Well, there is a benefit in having a common naming for layers in that it is possible to easily identify them programmatically. E.g., our setup will automatically take all checked out layers named “meta*” and add them to the bblayers.conf.sample file. That said, the name “meta” as it has been used, both for a specific layer (i.e., meta), as prefix for individual layers (e.g., meta-oe) and as prefix for a group of layers (e.g., meta-openembedded), is mostly confusing…
//Peter From: openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org [mailto:openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of Trevor Woerner Sent: den 27 februari 2018 16:27 To: OpenEmbedded Devel List <openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org>; Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer <openembedded-c...@lists.openembedded.org> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [oe] [RFC] Rename meta-openembedded to openembedded-extras On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:48 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <de...@denix.org<mailto:de...@denix.org>> wrote: On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 12:37:44PM -0800, akuster808 wrote: > I think openembededd-core is incorrect. it should have been > meta-openbedded-core or meta-core. It does have a layer called just "meta" though... In retrospect, using the word "meta" everywhere becomes useless. No layer contains actual sources and never should, so they're all "meta" data, it's redundant to have to say so in every layer's name (etc). It would have been better to use that space to convey something meaningful, such as: "whether a layer was designed to be a bsp, a distro, something else, or a combination", or perhaps other meaningful information. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
