From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ea0-f182.google.com (mail-ea0-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55B126D02F for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 19:39:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ea0-f182.google.com with SMTP id a15so1030477eae.27 for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:39:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=3LkpU+Gbl1o+0K5nY1tiksfR27P7gNv4IYSNBstz7Us=; b=Q6kKoPwSIGl4eMJLEZnCDc+SFvw6XOBs76p5OLh9N2XSVwxrgkg3daoa+kAlGyvkMP GkxQFZYRw/8SA73GYjWmwHrqTusJwiLVAUWaRptTF85zLzXX9yydkrdX8Kx50NPOZFT4 MVXPaJ4jC8hrdqrng23fqsSqDCqAtNI0EQdNHY6nCsrdjn4s6HfSHgLzuVYNbsC53imI liNInPokr7eqty9y4AO0fQgecdTtStgLXFZEKyYmXvARfpZ/57QcByPt0bB2BwT5bAVe JT8cZ0APxkyZ+hE+msaoeUSmdQUrhdTARKrWSo3kohXITg6v6wFhw/FO50jlHGl4JAAu 7J8A== X-Received: by 10.14.172.69 with SMTP id s45mr6383534eel.9.1389209946945; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:39:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (ip-89-176-104-107.net.upcbroadband.cz. [89.176.104.107]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id h3sm192334667eem.15.2014.01.08.11.39.05 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:39:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 20:39:16 +0100 From: Martin Jansa To: Trevor Woerner Message-ID: <20140108193916.GC3709@jama> References: <52CC470A.9030302@linaro.org> <1759035.6JVm74GdRW@helios> <52CD9CAB.5020501@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <52CD9CAB.5020501@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: Qt in OE-core 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: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 19:39:08 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 48733 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="+wcwqhATTmTB6/2m" Content-Disposition: inline --+wcwqhATTmTB6/2m Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:44:59PM -0500, Trevor Woerner wrote: > On 01/08/14 10:56, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > However, one concern I have always had with Qt being moved out of > > OE-Core though is that I very much doubt the same will happen with > > GTK+ and GNOME UI components that we carry, which I think will lead to > > the (perhaps erroneous, but logical) assumption in new users' minds > > that we support or recommend these more than we do Qt. Given Qt's > > popularity in the embedded space I don't think this would be the right > > message to be sending out. Any concrete ideas on how we would address > > this perception issue?=20 >=20 > Would it be worthwhile to ask that the OE TSC take on the task of > defining what is "core" and what is not? Does this definition already exi= st? >=20 > From the moment OE chose to adopt a layered strategy, people started > questioning how to define a layer and what recipes should be part of one > layer versus another. But it doesn't seem as though there's been much > interest in setting any definite rules or definitions in this regard. > Maybe it would be worth the effort to at least try? >=20 > In my opinion... >=20 > Personally I would be in favour of removing GTK+ and the GNOME UI from > the core and putting them in their own layer for all the same reasons I > think Qt should be in its own layer: The same for meta-x11 or meta-xorg, even when a lot of projects (maybe the most) will just include meta-x* by default. > - a "basic" image doesn't need them > - we can have different layers to track separate major releases (as with > qt3, qt4, and qt5) >=20 > There are so many ways to do GUI "things" on top of a Linux system. > Frankly I'm not even in a position where I could enumerate all of them, > or even sort them out: > - x11, wayland, mir, (directfb) > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_server) > - qt, gtk+, wxwidgets, tcl/tk, fltk > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_widget_toolkits) > - xlib, xcb (client libraries implementing x11 protocol) > - weston, mutter, kwin, clayland (display servers implementing the > wayland display server protocol) > - opengl, opengles, egl, ... >=20 > (I can't even begin to figure out how to draw a diagram that shows how > all these projects fit together!) >=20 > Maybe if there are significant competing projects which do the same > thing, then they should be implemented in their own layer: > - meta-python > - meta-perl >=20 > And if there are completing projects which do the same thing but which > aren't significantly large projects on their own (e.g. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_lightweight_web_servers) then > they should form a layer together of their own: > - meta-apache-httpd > - meta-http-servers > - boa > - cherokee > - lighttpd > - nginx >=20 > Or maybe all projects which do the same thing different ways should be > in their own layer? That way we don't have to distinguish between > "significant" and "lightweight" projects" > - meta-scripting-languages > - python > - perl > - ruby > - meta-http-servers > - apache > - boa > - cherokee > - lighttpd > - nginx >=20 > And maybe "core" should be just enough to get a console-based image worki= ng? +1 for whole e-mail. --=20 Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com --+wcwqhATTmTB6/2m Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlLNqWQACgkQN1Ujt2V2gByFEQCffsP5ngIG/8k2ST2lGQ9VpfDS PzwAoKMjjDnkZ7HyhbAa4RcZhlmdC86H =ozDP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --+wcwqhATTmTB6/2m--