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 > _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core