On 12/10/21 2:47 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 18:05, Richard Purdie > <[email protected] > <mailto:[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]
What about kernels? If the version this patch is against is EOL but a similar form was accepted in a later version , how would that play out here? - armin > > > 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 (#1386): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/1386 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]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
