On 12/1/19 10:52 PM, akuster808 wrote:
>
>
> On 12/1/19 1:47 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>> I've been looking through the layer index (master primarly), and I think we
>> need
>> to figure out a policy of when to remove a layer from master indexing.
>>
>> So I'd like to suggest the following policy:
>>
>> - For released branches, we do not remove layers from the index unless the
>> layer
>> URL is no longer valid. If it is not valid for more then 90 days, we should
>> remove it.
>>
>> - For master branch, we use a series of tests to determine if the layer is
>> still
>> actively maintained and useful to users:
>>
>> 1. Is the layer URL valid? If it has not been valid for more then 90
>> days,
>> it should be removed.
>>
>> 2. Does the layer claim to support any of the last three releases: the
>> current (or planned release) or prior two releases?
>> i.e. LAYERSERIES_COMPAT does not have thud, warrior or zeus in it.
>>
>> This means the layer has not been updated within the last 18 months,
>> and
>> should be removed.
>>
>>
>> So why the suggestion above?
>>
>> The URL one should be obvious, if the layer can no longer be downloaded then
>> it
>> should be removed. We should be able to detect when the index hasn't been
>> updated in 90 days. (We could consider dropping this to 45 or even 30 days.)
>>
>> Looking for the last 3 releases give people the opportunity to update their
>> layers, or other people to find layers that may be of interest to them and
>> submit updates. After 18 months, the layer is clearly no longer being
>> maintained and will cause more confusion then actually helping people find
>> something useful. (Also after 18 months of inactivity, there is a much
>> higher
>> likelihood of security vulnerabilities in the code.)
>
> Can we get a "Delete " button so I take that action myself for my Layers?
>
> Why put that burden on you and Paul?
I thought if you were the owner of the layer you could already remove it
yourself. (You just have to login, otherwise contact Paul or I and we can do it
pretty quickly.)
>>
>> So if the TSC agrees that this is a good proposal,
> Which TSC, there are two now : )
OpenEmbedded since they own the layer index.
--Mark
> thanks for sending that out.
>
> -Armin
>> I can work with Paul to
>> implement it (most likely manually at first, and then eventually via
>> automation.)
>>
>> --Mark
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-architecture
>
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-architecture mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-architecture
