In this case (and all where the source is moved to archive subdirectory or site as soon as there is newer release available) I think it's OK, especially when it's local for just the recipe.
Otherwise the "proper upstream location" can disappear at any time, like just after we release the metadata - and nobody will go back to morty, krogoth, jethro, dizzy to check how many apache2 archives were affected to fix all the SRC_URIs in recipes. On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Mark Hatle <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12/21/16 4:26 PM, Christopher Larson wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Mark Asselstine < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> This release of apache2 is no longer found in the main downloads area > >> but has been moved to the 'archives'. We should uprev apache2 but for > >> now this will at least get the builds working again. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Mark Asselstine <[email protected]> > >> > > > > Wouldn’t it make sense to do a recipe-local addition to MIRRORS to > > automatically fall back to the apache archive? > > > > That seems wrong to me. The recipe should point to the proper upstream > location > for the archive. If the archive moves, then the recipe should be updated > to match. > > I know you can easily do local workarounds for mirrors and such, but I > wouldn't > consider putting them into a recipe directly as a good approach as it will > hide > problems from people and make it unclear where the official download > location is. > > --Mark > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
