On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 18:05, Richard Purdie < [email protected]> wrote:
> > I'm in favour of adding the new category and I agree some kind of dates in > the > [reason] space would be nice to have. > > For the purposes of a patch upstream, the last commit date is much more > important than a release. I don't think this needs to be machine readable > as a > definition, it is better we have the appropriate info. Year is probably as > much > as we need since inactive software is usually measured in years. > Some upstreams are so old that they pre-date the 'git era' and tarballs are all there is. I guess either last commit or last release is ok, or both where possible. Dates can be full or can be shortened to YYYYMM or YYYY where needed. Something like: Upstream-Status: Inactive-Upstream [lastcommit: 2019, lastrelease: 2015] > We may need to put some kind of guide in the docs about what "inactive" > looks > like. > Yes, it's not just about commit or releases: it's also about unattended open bugs, and merge requests. Alex
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#1385): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/1385 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/87612566/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
