From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com (mail-ie0-f178.google.com [209.85.223.178]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 664A7601AA for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 23:20:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id lx4so4238943iec.23 for ; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:20:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=m8h746pIsEUGQGvjpfd4sskfU9pdaO9IWPqfXGwSdNk=; b=XwjVoduHC1Tb6R/ehDDHyNX0ZWkKisDDvNKb8KznoT2FwOOtBwSzUgmp2Y+tojl39s p6Gzhhz7DZHay5jvrSay5h3edeaQXKbuExK8ScIJ7yAK4JRl4YvIWEApyftmPIhgfwEE kyPvvuwvTAoqVRHgKhpttSlC92njiEUWE7PKlFuBrbRnfapn/geXhHacQW/emth9ogpH YSiIzWRM63JHgcBtgrcKO63QNuqIapJh4rTReihe4mRR3f6EDJS6CvMyF3tHe+bi3F2a 2ulwKBCUA6lVJ8iB5Bbm/hwop1xtlfMS6YxIslSKBcwbPt1e0/VI3sbw76jAtDRsF8xK +XPw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmx3v6rOvl7+zjvEy7WTao/yDBv9gGKFKK9YRBwLc0Wk2oMrnWH+M10Qi38U7VuTMsGAShg X-Received: by 10.50.4.9 with SMTP id g9mr6384675igg.22.1389309650129; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:20:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.141.83] (69-165-220-158.dsl.teksavvy.com. [69.165.220.158]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w4sm16815343igb.5.2014.01.09.15.20.48 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:20:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52CF2ED0.8090605@linaro.org> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:20:48 -0500 From: Trevor Woerner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <52CEEE43.1090209@linaro.org> <52CF2625.5030407@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: <52CF2625.5030407@windriver.com> Subject: Re: unmaintained layers X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 23:20:49 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/09/14 17:43, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 1/9/14, 3:45 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Trevor Woerner >> wrote: >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> At the last TSC meeting the topic of unmaintained layers came up. Here >>> is the sorted list of master layers from the layer index [1], would it >>> be possible for those in the know to indicate which layers are, or are >>> suspected of being, unmaintained? >> >> Wouldn't it be easier to do an initial sort based on commit activity >> ? Versus an >> opt-in query ? > > I agree.. see below for mine.. To be honest, I had asked people to indicate which layers they thought were *un*maintained (since I assumed that list would be small), but this way works too. Interestingly enough, had I sorted the list on commit activity, according to http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/?s=idle meta-realtime hasn't been touched in 10 months which would make me suspect it was abandoned.