* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
@ 2014-01-09 21:45 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-01-09 22:43 ` Mark Hatle
2014-01-09 23:35 ` Martin Jansa
2014-01-10 5:54 ` Andreas Müller
` (10 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Ashfield @ 2014-01-09 21:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: openembedded-core
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Trevor Woerner
<trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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 ?
>
>
> meta-aarch64
> meta-acer
> meta-ada
> meta-android
> meta-angstrom
> meta-arago-distro
> meta-arago-extras
> meta-asus
> meta-aurora
> meta-baryon
> meta-beagleboard
> meta-beagleboard-extras
> meta-browser
> meta-bug
> meta-buglabs
> meta-chicken
> meta-chiefriver
> meta-clutter
> meta-crownbay
> meta-crystalforest
> meta-cubox
> meta-darwin
> meta-eca
> meta-efikamx
> meta-efl
> meta-eldk
> meta-emenlow
> meta-erlang
> meta-ettus
> meta-filesystems
> meta-fri2
> meta-fsl-arm
> meta-fsl-arm-extra
> meta-fsl-demos
> meta-fsl-ppc
> meta-fso
> meta-games
> meta-geeksphone
> meta-gir
> meta-gnome
> meta-gpe
> meta-gstreamer10
> meta-guacamayo
> meta-gumstix
> meta-gumstix-community
> meta-gumstix-extras
> meta-hamradio
> meta-handheld
> meta-hipos
> meta-htc
> meta-igep
> meta-initramfs
> meta-intel
> meta-ivi
> meta-jasperforest
> meta-java
> meta-kde
> meta-kernel-dev
maintained.
> meta-kirkwood
> meta-linaro
> meta-linaro-toolchain
> meta-lsi
> meta-lxcbench
> meta-measured
> meta-mentor
> meta-micro
> meta-mingw
> meta-minnow
> meta-mono
> meta-multimedia
> meta-n450
> meta-netbookpro
> meta-netmodule
> meta-networking
> meta-nokia
> meta-nslu2
> meta-nuc
> meta-oe
> meta-openmoko
> meta-openpandora
> meta-openstack
> meta-openstack-compute-deploy
> meta-openstack-controller-deploy
> meta-openstack-qemu
All openstack layers are maintained.
> meta-opie
> meta-oracle-java
> meta-osmocombb
> meta-ouya
> meta-palm
> meta-perl
> meta-picosam9
> meta-qt3
> meta-qt5
> meta-raspberrypi
> meta-realtime
mantained
> meta-ro-rootfs
> meta-romley
> meta-ros
> meta-ruby
> meta-samsung
> meta-sdr
> meta-security
> meta-selinux
> meta-shr
> meta-shr-distro
> meta-slugos
> meta-smalltalk
> meta-sourcery
> meta-sugarbay
> meta-sunxi
> meta-sys940x
> meta-systemd
> meta-telephony
> meta-telldus
> meta-ti
> meta-tlk
> meta-tracing
> meta-virtualization
maintained
But I can't say if I didn't miss something I maintain in the list,
since it is long and I scanned
it quickly.
Bruce
> meta-web-kiosk
> meta-webos
> meta-webos-ports
> meta-webserver
> meta-woce
> meta-x10
> meta-xfce
> meta-xilinx
> meta-xilinx-community
> meta-yassl
> meta-yocto
> meta-yocto-bsp
> meta-zynq
> meta-zynq-milo
> openembedded-core
> toolchain-layer
>
>
> Thank you for your input, and best regards,
> Trevor
>
>
>
>
> [1] http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layers/
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
--
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 21:45 ` Bruce Ashfield
@ 2014-01-09 22:43 ` Mark Hatle
2014-01-09 23:20 ` Trevor Woerner
2014-01-09 23:35 ` Martin Jansa
1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Mark Hatle @ 2014-01-09 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
On 1/9/14, 3:45 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Trevor Woerner
> <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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..
>>
>>
>> meta-aarch64
>> meta-acer
>> meta-ada
>> meta-android
>> meta-angstrom
>> meta-arago-distro
>> meta-arago-extras
>> meta-asus
>> meta-aurora
>> meta-baryon
>> meta-beagleboard
>> meta-beagleboard-extras
>> meta-browser
>> meta-bug
>> meta-buglabs
>> meta-chicken
>> meta-chiefriver
>> meta-clutter
>> meta-crownbay
>> meta-crystalforest
>> meta-cubox
>> meta-darwin
>> meta-eca
>> meta-efikamx
>> meta-efl
>> meta-eldk
>> meta-emenlow
>> meta-erlang
>> meta-ettus
>> meta-filesystems
>> meta-fri2
>> meta-fsl-arm
>> meta-fsl-arm-extra
>> meta-fsl-demos
>> meta-fsl-ppc
>> meta-fso
>> meta-games
>> meta-geeksphone
>> meta-gir
>> meta-gnome
>> meta-gpe
>> meta-gstreamer10
>> meta-guacamayo
>> meta-gumstix
>> meta-gumstix-community
>> meta-gumstix-extras
>> meta-hamradio
>> meta-handheld
>> meta-hipos
>> meta-htc
>> meta-igep
>> meta-initramfs
>> meta-intel
>> meta-ivi
>> meta-jasperforest
>> meta-java
>> meta-kde
>> meta-kernel-dev
>
> maintained.
>
>> meta-kirkwood
>> meta-linaro
>> meta-linaro-toolchain
>> meta-lsi
>> meta-lxcbench
>> meta-measured
>> meta-mentor
>> meta-micro
>> meta-mingw
>> meta-minnow
>> meta-mono
>> meta-multimedia
>> meta-n450
>> meta-netbookpro
>> meta-netmodule
>> meta-networking
>> meta-nokia
>> meta-nslu2
>> meta-nuc
>> meta-oe
>> meta-openmoko
>> meta-openpandora
>> meta-openstack
>> meta-openstack-compute-deploy
>> meta-openstack-controller-deploy
>> meta-openstack-qemu
>
> All openstack layers are maintained.
>
>> meta-opie
>> meta-oracle-java
>> meta-osmocombb
>> meta-ouya
>> meta-palm
>> meta-perl
>> meta-picosam9
>> meta-qt3
>> meta-qt5
>> meta-raspberrypi
>> meta-realtime
>
> mantained
>
>> meta-ro-rootfs
>> meta-romley
>> meta-ros
>> meta-ruby
>> meta-samsung
>> meta-sdr
>> meta-security
>> meta-selinux
maintained
>> meta-shr
>> meta-shr-distro
>> meta-slugos
>> meta-smalltalk
>> meta-sourcery
>> meta-sugarbay
>> meta-sunxi
>> meta-sys940x
>> meta-systemd
>> meta-telephony
>> meta-telldus
>> meta-ti
>> meta-tlk
>> meta-tracing
>> meta-virtualization
>
> maintained
>
> But I can't say if I didn't miss something I maintain in the list,
> since it is long and I scanned
> it quickly.
>
> Bruce
>
>> meta-web-kiosk
>> meta-webos
>> meta-webos-ports
>> meta-webserver
>> meta-woce
>> meta-x10
>> meta-xfce
>> meta-xilinx
>> meta-xilinx-community
>> meta-yassl
>> meta-yocto
>> meta-yocto-bsp
>> meta-zynq
>> meta-zynq-milo
>> openembedded-core
>> toolchain-layer
>>
>>
>> Thank you for your input, and best regards,
>> Trevor
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layers/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 22:43 ` Mark Hatle
@ 2014-01-09 23:20 ` Trevor Woerner
2014-01-10 1:14 ` Philip Balister
2014-01-10 4:54 ` Bruce Ashfield
0 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Trevor Woerner @ 2014-01-09 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
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
>> <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 23:20 ` Trevor Woerner
@ 2014-01-10 1:14 ` Philip Balister
2014-01-10 4:54 ` Bruce Ashfield
1 sibling, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Philip Balister @ 2014-01-10 1:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: openembedded-core
On 01/09/2014 06:20 PM, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> 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
>>> <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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.
This approach is a good test of which layer maintainers are paying
attention to list traffic :)
Philip
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 23:20 ` Trevor Woerner
2014-01-10 1:14 ` Philip Balister
@ 2014-01-10 4:54 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-01-10 5:47 ` Marko Lindqvist
1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Ashfield @ 2014-01-10 4:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Trevor Woerner
<trevor.woerner@linaro.org> wrote:
> 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
>>> <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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.
It's always easier to get answers to a question when presented with a clear
statement (like sending a patch, or a small list in the case), since
it is something
that people can quickly scan and react to ("Hey, they think my layer
is unmaintained!").
But agreed, either way works (say if they are maintained or not) and you'll get
the information, I just suspect you'll get it more quickly with a list
that makes
a clear statement and throws things into initial buckets on their behalf.
Cheers,
Bruce
>
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
--
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-10 4:54 ` Bruce Ashfield
@ 2014-01-10 5:47 ` Marko Lindqvist
0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Marko Lindqvist @ 2014-01-10 5:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On 10 January 2014 06:54, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Trevor Woerner
> <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> wrote:
>> 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
>>>> <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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.
I maintain meta-games, though I have only very little time to give it
- not much activity to add new games, just keeping existing things
working. That's to say that I would consider passing main
maintainership, and keeping working only on my own games myself, to
someone more active if someone steps up.
- ML
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 21:45 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-01-09 22:43 ` Mark Hatle
@ 2014-01-09 23:35 ` Martin Jansa
2014-01-10 1:23 ` Chris Larson
2014-01-10 4:50 ` Bruce Ashfield
1 sibling, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Martin Jansa @ 2014-01-09 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Ashfield; +Cc: openembedded-core
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4125 bytes --]
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 04:45:38PM -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Trevor Woerner
> <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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 ?
Some BSPs are valid for very long time without any commit in it. So I
think it will show a lot of false-possitives.
> > meta-aarch64
> > meta-acer
> > meta-ada
> > meta-android
> > meta-angstrom
> > meta-arago-distro
> > meta-arago-extras
> > meta-asus
> > meta-aurora
> > meta-baryon
> > meta-beagleboard
> > meta-beagleboard-extras
> > meta-browser
> > meta-bug
> > meta-buglabs
> > meta-chicken
> > meta-chiefriver
> > meta-clutter
> > meta-crownbay
> > meta-crystalforest
> > meta-cubox
> > meta-darwin
> > meta-eca
> > meta-efikamx
> > meta-efl
> > meta-eldk
> > meta-emenlow
> > meta-erlang
> > meta-ettus
> > meta-filesystems
> > meta-fri2
> > meta-fsl-arm
> > meta-fsl-arm-extra
> > meta-fsl-demos
> > meta-fsl-ppc
> > meta-fso
> > meta-games
> > meta-geeksphone
> > meta-gir
> > meta-gnome
> > meta-gpe
> > meta-gstreamer10
> > meta-guacamayo
> > meta-gumstix
> > meta-gumstix-community
> > meta-gumstix-extras
> > meta-hamradio
> > meta-handheld
> > meta-hipos
> > meta-htc
> > meta-igep
> > meta-initramfs
> > meta-intel
> > meta-ivi
> > meta-jasperforest
> > meta-java
> > meta-kde
> > meta-kernel-dev
>
> maintained.
>
> > meta-kirkwood
> > meta-linaro
> > meta-linaro-toolchain
> > meta-lsi
> > meta-lxcbench
> > meta-measured
> > meta-mentor
> > meta-micro
> > meta-mingw
> > meta-minnow
> > meta-mono
> > meta-multimedia
> > meta-n450
> > meta-netbookpro
> > meta-netmodule
> > meta-networking
> > meta-nokia
> > meta-nslu2
> > meta-nuc
> > meta-oe
> > meta-openmoko
> > meta-openpandora
> > meta-openstack
> > meta-openstack-compute-deploy
> > meta-openstack-controller-deploy
> > meta-openstack-qemu
>
> All openstack layers are maintained.
>
> > meta-opie
> > meta-oracle-java
> > meta-osmocombb
> > meta-ouya
> > meta-palm
> > meta-perl
> > meta-picosam9
> > meta-qt3
> > meta-qt5
> > meta-raspberrypi
> > meta-realtime
>
> mantained
>
> > meta-ro-rootfs
> > meta-romley
> > meta-ros
> > meta-ruby
> > meta-samsung
> > meta-sdr
> > meta-security
> > meta-selinux
> > meta-shr
> > meta-shr-distro
> > meta-slugos
> > meta-smalltalk
> > meta-sourcery
> > meta-sugarbay
> > meta-sunxi
> > meta-sys940x
> > meta-systemd
> > meta-telephony
> > meta-telldus
> > meta-ti
> > meta-tlk
> > meta-tracing
> > meta-virtualization
>
> maintained
>
> But I can't say if I didn't miss something I maintain in the list,
> since it is long and I scanned
> it quickly.
>
> Bruce
>
> > meta-web-kiosk
> > meta-webos
> > meta-webos-ports
> > meta-webserver
> > meta-woce
> > meta-x10
> > meta-xfce
> > meta-xilinx
> > meta-xilinx-community
> > meta-yassl
> > meta-yocto
> > meta-yocto-bsp
> > meta-zynq
> > meta-zynq-milo
> > openembedded-core
> > toolchain-layer
> >
> >
> > Thank you for your input, and best regards,
> > Trevor
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layers/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openembedded-core mailing list
> > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>
>
> --
> "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
> thee at its end"
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 23:35 ` Martin Jansa
@ 2014-01-10 1:23 ` Chris Larson
2014-01-10 4:50 ` Bruce Ashfield
1 sibling, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Chris Larson @ 2014-01-10 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Jansa; +Cc: openembedded-core
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 990 bytes --]
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 04:45:38PM -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Trevor Woerner
> > <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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 ?
>
In case we're sticking to opt-in rather than opt-out, meta-mentor,
meta-sourcery, meta-ro-rootfs, and meta-tracing are maintained by Mentor
Graphics at this time. :)
--
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1467 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 23:35 ` Martin Jansa
2014-01-10 1:23 ` Chris Larson
@ 2014-01-10 4:50 ` Bruce Ashfield
1 sibling, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Ashfield @ 2014-01-10 4:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Jansa; +Cc: openembedded-core
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 04:45:38PM -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Trevor Woerner
>> <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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 ?
>
> Some BSPs are valid for very long time without any commit in it. So I
> think it will show a lot of false-possitives.
Just false "suspicions" :)
Bruce
>
>> > meta-aarch64
>> > meta-acer
>> > meta-ada
>> > meta-android
>> > meta-angstrom
>> > meta-arago-distro
>> > meta-arago-extras
>> > meta-asus
>> > meta-aurora
>> > meta-baryon
>> > meta-beagleboard
>> > meta-beagleboard-extras
>> > meta-browser
>> > meta-bug
>> > meta-buglabs
>> > meta-chicken
>> > meta-chiefriver
>> > meta-clutter
>> > meta-crownbay
>> > meta-crystalforest
>> > meta-cubox
>> > meta-darwin
>> > meta-eca
>> > meta-efikamx
>> > meta-efl
>> > meta-eldk
>> > meta-emenlow
>> > meta-erlang
>> > meta-ettus
>> > meta-filesystems
>> > meta-fri2
>> > meta-fsl-arm
>> > meta-fsl-arm-extra
>> > meta-fsl-demos
>> > meta-fsl-ppc
>> > meta-fso
>> > meta-games
>> > meta-geeksphone
>> > meta-gir
>> > meta-gnome
>> > meta-gpe
>> > meta-gstreamer10
>> > meta-guacamayo
>> > meta-gumstix
>> > meta-gumstix-community
>> > meta-gumstix-extras
>> > meta-hamradio
>> > meta-handheld
>> > meta-hipos
>> > meta-htc
>> > meta-igep
>> > meta-initramfs
>> > meta-intel
>> > meta-ivi
>> > meta-jasperforest
>> > meta-java
>> > meta-kde
>> > meta-kernel-dev
>>
>> maintained.
>>
>> > meta-kirkwood
>> > meta-linaro
>> > meta-linaro-toolchain
>> > meta-lsi
>> > meta-lxcbench
>> > meta-measured
>> > meta-mentor
>> > meta-micro
>> > meta-mingw
>> > meta-minnow
>> > meta-mono
>> > meta-multimedia
>> > meta-n450
>> > meta-netbookpro
>> > meta-netmodule
>> > meta-networking
>> > meta-nokia
>> > meta-nslu2
>> > meta-nuc
>> > meta-oe
>> > meta-openmoko
>> > meta-openpandora
>> > meta-openstack
>> > meta-openstack-compute-deploy
>> > meta-openstack-controller-deploy
>> > meta-openstack-qemu
>>
>> All openstack layers are maintained.
>>
>> > meta-opie
>> > meta-oracle-java
>> > meta-osmocombb
>> > meta-ouya
>> > meta-palm
>> > meta-perl
>> > meta-picosam9
>> > meta-qt3
>> > meta-qt5
>> > meta-raspberrypi
>> > meta-realtime
>>
>> mantained
>>
>> > meta-ro-rootfs
>> > meta-romley
>> > meta-ros
>> > meta-ruby
>> > meta-samsung
>> > meta-sdr
>> > meta-security
>> > meta-selinux
>> > meta-shr
>> > meta-shr-distro
>> > meta-slugos
>> > meta-smalltalk
>> > meta-sourcery
>> > meta-sugarbay
>> > meta-sunxi
>> > meta-sys940x
>> > meta-systemd
>> > meta-telephony
>> > meta-telldus
>> > meta-ti
>> > meta-tlk
>> > meta-tracing
>> > meta-virtualization
>>
>> maintained
>>
>> But I can't say if I didn't miss something I maintain in the list,
>> since it is long and I scanned
>> it quickly.
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>> > meta-web-kiosk
>> > meta-webos
>> > meta-webos-ports
>> > meta-webserver
>> > meta-woce
>> > meta-x10
>> > meta-xfce
>> > meta-xilinx
>> > meta-xilinx-community
>> > meta-yassl
>> > meta-yocto
>> > meta-yocto-bsp
>> > meta-zynq
>> > meta-zynq-milo
>> > openembedded-core
>> > toolchain-layer
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you for your input, and best regards,
>> > Trevor
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [1] http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layers/
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Openembedded-core mailing list
>> > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
>> thee at its end"
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
> --
> Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com
--
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
2014-01-09 21:45 ` Bruce Ashfield
@ 2014-01-10 5:54 ` Andreas Müller
2014-01-10 6:29 ` Nathan Rossi
` (9 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Müller @ 2014-01-10 5:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: openembedded-core
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Trevor Woerner
<trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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?
>
>
...
> meta-gumstix-community
maintained
...
> meta-xfce
maintained
...
Andreas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
2014-01-09 21:45 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-01-10 5:54 ` Andreas Müller
@ 2014-01-10 6:29 ` Nathan Rossi
2014-01-10 7:03 ` Fathi Boudra
` (8 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Nathan Rossi @ 2014-01-10 6:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: openembedded-core
> -----Original Message-----
> From: openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org
> [mailto:openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of
> Trevor Woerner
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 4:45 AM
> To: openembedded-core
> Subject: [OE-core] unmaintained layers
>
> 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?
>
>
...
> meta-xilinx
Maintained.
Regards,
Nathan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 6:29 ` Nathan Rossi
@ 2014-01-10 7:03 ` Fathi Boudra
2014-01-10 7:08 ` Lukas Bulwahn
` (7 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Fathi Boudra @ 2014-01-10 7:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: openembedded-core
On 9 January 2014 20:45, Trevor Woerner <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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?
>
>
> meta-aarch64
maintained.
> meta-acer
> meta-ada
> meta-android
> meta-angstrom
> meta-arago-distro
> meta-arago-extras
> meta-asus
> meta-aurora
> meta-baryon
> meta-beagleboard
> meta-beagleboard-extras
> meta-browser
> meta-bug
> meta-buglabs
> meta-chicken
> meta-chiefriver
> meta-clutter
> meta-crownbay
> meta-crystalforest
> meta-cubox
> meta-darwin
> meta-eca
> meta-efikamx
> meta-efl
> meta-eldk
> meta-emenlow
> meta-erlang
> meta-ettus
> meta-filesystems
> meta-fri2
> meta-fsl-arm
> meta-fsl-arm-extra
> meta-fsl-demos
> meta-fsl-ppc
> meta-fso
> meta-games
> meta-geeksphone
> meta-gir
> meta-gnome
> meta-gpe
> meta-gstreamer10
> meta-guacamayo
> meta-gumstix
> meta-gumstix-community
> meta-gumstix-extras
> meta-hamradio
> meta-handheld
> meta-hipos
> meta-htc
> meta-igep
> meta-initramfs
> meta-intel
> meta-ivi
> meta-jasperforest
> meta-java
> meta-kde
> meta-kernel-dev
> meta-kirkwood
> meta-linaro
> meta-linaro-toolchain
both maintained.
> meta-lsi
> meta-lxcbench
> meta-measured
> meta-mentor
> meta-micro
> meta-mingw
> meta-minnow
> meta-mono
> meta-multimedia
> meta-n450
> meta-netbookpro
> meta-netmodule
> meta-networking
> meta-nokia
> meta-nslu2
> meta-nuc
> meta-oe
> meta-openmoko
> meta-openpandora
> meta-openstack
> meta-openstack-compute-deploy
> meta-openstack-controller-deploy
> meta-openstack-qemu
> meta-opie
> meta-oracle-java
> meta-osmocombb
> meta-ouya
> meta-palm
> meta-perl
> meta-picosam9
> meta-qt3
> meta-qt5
> meta-raspberrypi
> meta-realtime
> meta-ro-rootfs
> meta-romley
> meta-ros
> meta-ruby
> meta-samsung
> meta-sdr
> meta-security
> meta-selinux
> meta-shr
> meta-shr-distro
> meta-slugos
> meta-smalltalk
> meta-sourcery
> meta-sugarbay
> meta-sunxi
> meta-sys940x
> meta-systemd
> meta-telephony
> meta-telldus
> meta-ti
> meta-tlk
> meta-tracing
> meta-virtualization
> meta-web-kiosk
> meta-webos
> meta-webos-ports
> meta-webserver
> meta-woce
> meta-x10
> meta-xfce
> meta-xilinx
> meta-xilinx-community
> meta-yassl
> meta-yocto
> meta-yocto-bsp
> meta-zynq
> meta-zynq-milo
> openembedded-core
> toolchain-layer
>
>
> Thank you for your input, and best regards,
> Trevor
>
>
>
>
> [1] http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layers/
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Cheers,
Fathi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 7:03 ` Fathi Boudra
@ 2014-01-10 7:08 ` Lukas Bulwahn
2014-01-10 7:21 ` Hongxu Jia
` (6 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Lukas Bulwahn @ 2014-01-10 7:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner, openembedded-core
Hi Trevor,
On 01/09/2014 07:45 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?
meta-ros is maintained.
Lukas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 7:08 ` Lukas Bulwahn
@ 2014-01-10 7:21 ` Hongxu Jia
2014-01-10 13:20 ` Mario Schuknecht
` (5 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Hongxu Jia @ 2014-01-10 7:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner, openembedded-core
On 01/10/2014 02:45 AM, 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?
>
> meta-filesystems
Maintained
> meta-perl
Maintained
//Hongxu
[1] http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layers/
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core
mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 7:21 ` Hongxu Jia
@ 2014-01-10 13:20 ` Mario Schuknecht
2014-01-10 14:01 ` Paul Eggleton
` (4 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Mario Schuknecht @ 2014-01-10 13:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner, openembedded-core
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 336 bytes --]
>
> 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?
>
>
>
> meta-hipos
>
> is maintained.
Mario
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 708 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 13:20 ` Mario Schuknecht
@ 2014-01-10 14:01 ` Paul Eggleton
2014-01-10 15:35 ` Koen Kooi
2014-01-10 15:51 ` Trevor Woerner
2014-01-10 16:28 ` Saul Wold
` (3 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Paul Eggleton @ 2014-01-10 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
On Thursday 09 January 2014 13:45:23 Trevor Woerner wrote:
> 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?
This is all very interesting with people piping up that their layers are
maintained, but I'm not sure it helps solve the overall problem.
We have some immediate issues with patches to particular layers going
unmerged. That's in the process of being resolved.
However, looking to the future it was suggested at the TSC meeting it would be
nice to have some kind of measure or indication for the layer (ideally in the
layer index) as to how well-maintained it is. Is there a practical and
objective measurement we can have about the layer's maintenance status? I
don't have a good idea of what this would actually mean - how many outstanding
patches it has? How recently it has been built/tested?
Also, if it does appear that a layer has gone "unmaintained" by popular
consensus, what should actually be done about it?
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-10 14:01 ` Paul Eggleton
@ 2014-01-10 15:35 ` Koen Kooi
2014-01-10 15:51 ` Trevor Woerner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Koen Kooi @ 2014-01-10 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Eggleton; +Cc: OE-core
Op 10 jan. 2014, om 15:01 heeft Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> het volgende geschreven:
> On Thursday 09 January 2014 13:45:23 Trevor Woerner wrote:
>> 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?
>
> This is all very interesting with people piping up that their layers are
> maintained, but I'm not sure it helps solve the overall problem.
>
> We have some immediate issues with patches to particular layers going
> unmerged. That's in the process of being resolved.
>
> However, looking to the future it was suggested at the TSC meeting it would be
> nice to have some kind of measure or indication for the layer (ideally in the
> layer index) as to how well-maintained it is. Is there a practical and
> objective measurement we can have about the layer's maintenance status? I
> don't have a good idea of what this would actually mean - how many outstanding
> patches it has? How recently it has been built/tested?
Or how long it takes a patch to get applied on average.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-10 14:01 ` Paul Eggleton
2014-01-10 15:35 ` Koen Kooi
@ 2014-01-10 15:51 ` Trevor Woerner
2014-01-10 16:02 ` Philip Balister
1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Trevor Woerner @ 2014-01-10 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
Hi Paul,
On 01/10/14 09:01, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> This is all very interesting with people piping up that their layers
> are maintained, but I'm not sure it helps solve the overall problem.
> Also, if it does appear that a layer has gone "unmaintained" by
> popular consensus, what should actually be done about it?
I was hoping I could put together a list of the layers which are no
longer maintained to see if we could find people who might be interested
in stepping up and taking on their maintenance. Or at the very least,
clarifying a given layers' maintenance status.
At the last OE TSC meeting the issue of unmaintained layers was brought
up, I asked several times if people could specify to which layers they
were referring, but nobody replied. So people are concerned about layers
that have no maintainer, but nobody can say which ones (?). In my
opinion I thought it would be easier to solve this problem if we could
at least start by defining it.
As to what can be done about it: if a layer is not maintained, and
nobody cares for the layer, we should drop it from the list or at least
mark it as such ("buyer beware"). If a layer is not maintained, and
people do care, then we'll need to try to find someone to take
responsibility for it (we should, at the very least, make the attempt).
Also I think we should identify layers that people do care about, whose
maintenance is questionable, which are not hosted in a way where the
community can apply necessary patches to easily.
Best regards,
Trevor
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-10 15:51 ` Trevor Woerner
@ 2014-01-10 16:02 ` Philip Balister
2014-01-10 16:24 ` Trevor Woerner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Philip Balister @ 2014-01-10 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: openembedded-core
On 01/10/2014 10:51 AM, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On 01/10/14 09:01, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>> This is all very interesting with people piping up that their layers
>> are maintained, but I'm not sure it helps solve the overall problem.
>
>> Also, if it does appear that a layer has gone "unmaintained" by
>> popular consensus, what should actually be done about it?
>
> I was hoping I could put together a list of the layers which are no
> longer maintained to see if we could find people who might be interested
> in stepping up and taking on their maintenance. Or at the very least,
> clarifying a given layers' maintenance status.
>
> At the last OE TSC meeting the issue of unmaintained layers was brought
> up, I asked several times if people could specify to which layers they
> were referring, but nobody replied. So people are concerned about layers
> that have no maintainer, but nobody can say which ones (?). In my
> opinion I thought it would be easier to solve this problem if we could
> at least start by defining it.
BTW, I maintain meta-sdr.
Philip
>
> As to what can be done about it: if a layer is not maintained, and
> nobody cares for the layer, we should drop it from the list or at least
> mark it as such ("buyer beware"). If a layer is not maintained, and
> people do care, then we'll need to try to find someone to take
> responsibility for it (we should, at the very least, make the attempt).
> Also I think we should identify layers that people do care about, whose
> maintenance is questionable, which are not hosted in a way where the
> community can apply necessary patches to easily.
>
> Best regards,
> Trevor
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 14:01 ` Paul Eggleton
@ 2014-01-10 16:28 ` Saul Wold
2014-01-10 17:27 ` Andrei Gherzan
` (2 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Saul Wold @ 2014-01-10 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner, openembedded-core
On 01/09/2014 10:45 AM, 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?
>
>
> meta-baryon
> meta-security
> meta-web-kiosk
These are being maintained
Sau!
>
>
> Thank you for your input, and best regards,
> Trevor
>
>
>
>
> [1] http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layers/
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 16:28 ` Saul Wold
@ 2014-01-10 17:27 ` Andrei Gherzan
2014-01-10 18:54 ` João Henrique Freitas
2014-01-12 20:28 ` Mike Looijmans
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Andrei Gherzan @ 2014-01-10 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: openembedded-core
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1937 bytes --]
Hi,
On Jan 9, 2014 8:45 PM, "Trevor Woerner" <trevor.woerner@linaro.org> 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?
>
>
> meta-aarch64
> meta-acer
> meta-ada
> meta-android
> meta-angstrom
> meta-arago-distro
> meta-arago-extras
> meta-asus
> meta-aurora
> meta-baryon
> meta-beagleboard
> meta-beagleboard-extras
> meta-browser
> meta-bug
> meta-buglabs
> meta-chicken
> meta-chiefriver
> meta-clutter
> meta-crownbay
> meta-crystalforest
> meta-cubox
> meta-darwin
> meta-eca
> meta-efikamx
> meta-efl
> meta-eldk
> meta-emenlow
> meta-erlang
> meta-ettus
> meta-filesystems
> meta-fri2
> meta-fsl-arm
> meta-fsl-arm-extra
> meta-fsl-demos
> meta-fsl-ppc
> meta-fso
> meta-games
> meta-geeksphone
> meta-gir
> meta-gnome
> meta-gpe
> meta-gstreamer10
> meta-guacamayo
> meta-gumstix
> meta-gumstix-community
> meta-gumstix-extras
> meta-hamradio
> meta-handheld
> meta-hipos
> meta-htc
> meta-igep
> meta-initramfs
> meta-intel
> meta-ivi
> meta-jasperforest
> meta-java
> meta-kde
> meta-kernel-dev
> meta-kirkwood
> meta-linaro
> meta-linaro-toolchain
> meta-lsi
> meta-lxcbench
> meta-measured
> meta-mentor
> meta-micro
> meta-mingw
> meta-minnow
> meta-mono
> meta-multimedia
> meta-n450
> meta-netbookpro
> meta-netmodule
> meta-networking
> meta-nokia
> meta-nslu2
> meta-nuc
> meta-oe
> meta-openmoko
> meta-openpandora
> meta-openstack
> meta-openstack-compute-deploy
> meta-openstack-controller-deploy
> meta-openstack-qemu
> meta-opie
> meta-oracle-java
> meta-osmocombb
> meta-ouya
> meta-palm
> meta-perl
> meta-picosam9
> meta-qt3
> meta-qt5
> meta-raspberrypi
Maintained.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2770 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 17:27 ` Andrei Gherzan
@ 2014-01-10 18:54 ` João Henrique Freitas
2014-01-12 20:28 ` Mike Looijmans
11 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: João Henrique Freitas @ 2014-01-10 18:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trevor Woerner; +Cc: openembedded-core
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 123 bytes --]
Hi,
meta-erlang
>
maintained.
--
João Henrique Ferreira de Freitas - joaohf_at_gmail.com
Campinas-SP-Brasil
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 469 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: unmaintained layers
2014-01-09 18:45 unmaintained layers Trevor Woerner
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2014-01-10 18:54 ` João Henrique Freitas
@ 2014-01-12 20:28 ` Mike Looijmans
2014-01-12 20:42 ` Trevor Woerner
11 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Mike Looijmans @ 2014-01-12 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
On 9-1-2014 19:45, 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?
...
> meta-zynq-milo
Worse than unmaintained - this one was taken out of existence last
Friday. I've already notified Paul Eggleton, so it should removed from
the list soon.
Mike.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread