[RFC] Rename meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras

[RFC] Rename meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras

[Andrea Adami]

All,
it seems there is some consensus about reordering/cleaning the
"OpenEmbedded layers".

I think that before starting any cleaning *inside* we should finally
clean up the confusion about meta-oe meta-openembedded
openembedded-layers, etc..

I think it would be advisable to rename the repository from
meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras, matching the
openembedded-core naming schema.

Regards
Andrea


P.S.
One layer of this repo would be the (in)famous meta-oe.
I can't imagine right now a definition for it: it contains old
versions of oe-core recipes, expunged recipes, tools and libraries
needed by other layers (i.e. tslib), etc. etc.
This one will need a separate thread.

Re: [RFC] Rename meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras

[akuster808]

On 02/21/2018 11:55 PM, Andrea Adami wrote:
> All,
> it seems there is some consensus about reordering/cleaning the
> "OpenEmbedded layers".
>
> I think that before starting any cleaning *inside* we should finally
> clean up the confusion about meta-oe meta-openembedded
> openembedded-layers, etc..
>
> I think it would be advisable to rename the repository from
> meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras, matching the
> openembedded-core naming schema.
Renaming an existing repo will cause more damage than what benefit one
thinks it may solve. 

I think openembededd-core is incorrect. it should have been
meta-openbedded-core or meta-core.

- armin
>
> Regards
> Andrea
>
>
> P.S.
> One layer of this repo would be the (in)famous meta-oe.
> I can't imagine right now a definition for it: it contains old
> versions of oe-core recipes, expunged recipes, tools and libraries
> needed by other layers (i.e. tslib), etc. etc.
> This one will need a separate thread.

Re: [oe] [RFC] Rename meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 12:37:44PM -0800, akuster808 wrote:
> On 02/21/2018 11:55 PM, Andrea Adami wrote:
> > All,
> > it seems there is some consensus about reordering/cleaning the
> > "OpenEmbedded layers".
> >
> > I think that before starting any cleaning *inside* we should finally
> > clean up the confusion about meta-oe meta-openembedded
> > openembedded-layers, etc..
> >
> > I think it would be advisable to rename the repository from
> > meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras, matching the
> > openembedded-core naming schema.
> Renaming an existing repo will cause more damage than what benefit one
> thinks it may solve. 

Agree.


> I think openembededd-core is incorrect. it should have been
> meta-openbedded-core or meta-core.

It does have a layer called just "meta" though...


> - armin
> >
> > Regards
> > Andrea
> >
> >
> > P.S.
> > One layer of this repo would be the (in)famous meta-oe.
> > I can't imagine right now a definition for it: it contains old
> > versions of oe-core recipes, expunged recipes, tools and libraries
> > needed by other layers (i.e. tslib), etc. etc.
> > This one will need a separate thread.
> 
> 
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Re: [oe] [RFC] Rename meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras

[Trevor Woerner]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 737 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:48 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 12:37:44PM -0800, akuster808 wrote:
> > I think openembededd-core is incorrect. it should have been
> > meta-openbedded-core or meta-core.
>
> It does have a layer called just "meta" though...
>

In retrospect, using the word "meta" everywhere becomes useless. No layer
contains actual sources and never should, so they're all "meta" data, it's
redundant to have to say so in every layer's name (etc).

It would have been better to use that space to convey something meaningful,
such as: "whether a layer was designed to be a bsp, a distro, something
else, or a combination", or perhaps other meaningful information.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1188 bytes --]

Re: [oe] [RFC] Rename meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras

[Peter Kjellerstedt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1664 bytes --]

Well, there is a benefit in having a common naming for layers in that it is possible to easily identify them programmatically. E.g., our setup will automatically take all checked out layers named “meta*” and add them to the bblayers.conf.sample file. That said, the name “meta” as it has been used, both for a specific layer (i.e., meta), as prefix for individual layers (e.g., meta-oe) and as prefix for a group of layers (e.g., meta-openembedded), is mostly confusing…

//Peter

From: openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org [mailto:openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of Trevor Woerner
Sent: den 27 februari 2018 16:27
To: OpenEmbedded Devel List <openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org>; Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [oe] [RFC] Rename meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:48 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org<mailto:denis@denix.org>> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 12:37:44PM -0800, akuster808 wrote:
> I think openembededd-core is incorrect. it should have been
> meta-openbedded-core or meta-core.

It does have a layer called just "meta" though...

In retrospect, using the word "meta" everywhere becomes useless. No layer contains actual sources and never should, so they're all "meta" data, it's redundant to have to say so in every layer's name (etc).
It would have been better to use that space to convey something meaningful, such as: "whether a layer was designed to be a bsp, a distro, something else, or a combination", or perhaps other meaningful information.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5028 bytes --]