Re: Disruptive changes and the next LTS 3.5 - what to aim for?
On Thu, 2021-09-09 at 20:43 -0700, akuster808 wrote:
At the very least we probably have to detect usage of old variables. There is an
argument that compatibility could be retained for some of them for a transition
period and previously there has been a lot of requests for a longer
deprecation/transition period so it is unclear if users would accept/want
another flag day.
Yes.How much do we help users with migration?You mean like in a script?
I mean would the OE/YP people want to do the work involved, both in planning itIs there wide support for the changes?You mean this LF project? https://inclusivenaming.org ( Think its overly
for the core and then doing the work in updating their own layers.
All good questions. The days of work I was mentioning would cover some of thisIf the master branch gets renamed, what about yocto-buildhistory,
but there is a lot to do, more than people realise.
I remembered what I was missing too:
j) Convert to SPDX license names
We should really switch to using SPDX license names in the LICENSE field
directly and be able to drop the current SPDX mapping code.