From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dan.rpsys.net (5751f4a1.skybroadband.com [87.81.244.161]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C91F2719D0 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 03:31:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v1K3VB4O026479 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 03:31:11 GMT Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id yzTGzh8x71wg for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 03:31:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hex ([192.168.3.34]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v1K3V4fJ026474 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 03:31:07 GMT Message-ID: <1487561463.17001.28.camel@linuxfoundation.org> From: Richard Purdie To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 19:31:03 -0800 In-Reply-To: <3870658c-01ec-252b-9940-a6af3fb1f529@balister.org> References: <20170217180254.GA3276@jama> <20170217182816.GD8436@mentor.com> <3870658c-01ec-252b-9940-a6af3fb1f529@balister.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2-0ubuntu3.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Splitting meta-oe? X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 03:31:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Fri, 2017-02-17 at 14:45 -0500, Philip Balister wrote: > And I'm with these gyus. Splitting the git repository doesn't solve > any underlying problems. The real problem from my point of view is > very few of use are actually paid to maintain the layers we maintain. > > Employers want to pay things they profit from, and that is not paying > someone to maintain "core infrastructure". > > Layer maintainers interests change over time, and you burn out > supporting people who get to do all the cool stuff with the layers > you maintain. In the end, you get all the crap and non of the glory. > Within this list, most people appreciate your work. Outside the > community, people completely underestimate the amount of work > required to keep the ecosystem running. > > Yeah, add my name to the list of cranky people. I do think this is a valid question that Ross asks and that whilst the first quick reaction is "no", its worth thinking about the pros/cons. The pros to me would be about better test time on patches and in theory more specialist knowledge. This isn't to say Martin/Joe don't do a bad job but the size of meta-oe does mean there are limits. The cons are more around finding suitable layer maintainers, which as we all know are hard to find. I'd probably suggest that: a) We need to encourage/empower more people to maintain layers b) Having better infrastructure, tools and processes that help a) would    therefore be desirable. c) We need to be willing to separate out pieces for people to maintain    in such layers. It might not always work out but we should be     willing to try. As for the comments about core changes, I really do try hard not to make them in many ways. The ones we do make, I'd hope are for the right reasons. No easy answers but don't shoot Ross for asking what I think is a reasonable question. Cheers, Richard