From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from r-finger.com (r-finger.com [178.79.160.5]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46C02E00348 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 07:34:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (host81-153-115-216.range81-153.btcentralplus.com [81.153.115.216]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by r-finger.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 429B399A4 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:33:53 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <508164D0.1020408@r-finger.com> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:33:52 +0100 From: Tomas Frydrych User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.5) Gecko/20120624 Icedove/10.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 08:34:31 -0700 Subject: why was meta-dlna submodule history stripped out? X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:34:08 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Looking over meta-dlna in Yocto git I see it's little more than a fork of meta-guacamayo from guacamayo-project.org -- could someone please explain to me why the git history was stripped out from this 'combo' layer? (I am delighted Intel is finding Guacamayo useful, but the obliteration of the history makes it look as if the credit for this official Yocto layer goes to Intel; I am sure that was not intentional.) I am also interested in knowing why the fork was deemed necessary in the first place, just in case it was for technical reasons that could be addressed at source. Tomas