Re: meta-gplv2? [Was Re: parted_1.8.6.bb: add parted that not GPLv3]

[Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>]

On 08/08/2015 08:09 PM, Philip Balister wrote:
>> By 'self-sustaining' I mean 'being able to continuously produce quality
>> work'. Looking at layers in meta-openembedded, not all of them are of
>> high quality. Meta-gnome in particular is badly out of date, because no
>> one wants to maintain it properly. If oe-core starts taking a lot more
>> volunteer contributions, and the same thing happens (a volunteer
>> contributes a large set of recipes, then disappears), what is supposed
>> to happen then?
>
> You are missing the point. We now use layers to segregate sets of
> recipes o stuff that is not interesting to many people and becomes
> obsolete may decline without compromising heavily used layers. This is
> all part of the evolution of OpenEmbedded over many, many years.
>
> If people lose interest in meta-gplv2, then so be it.

This is perfectly fine with me. However, the subject has been whether 
the scope of *oe-core/poky* can be expanded without compromising 
quality. I'm not sure at which point it got confused with general OE, so 
I can only refer you back to several emails up this thread:

http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2015-July/108037.html
http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2015-July/108167.html
http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2015-July/108208.html


Alex