On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 10:07 AM Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@...> wrote:

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 2:06 AM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@...> wrote:

On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 01:39 -0800, Andre McCurdy wrote:

On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 2:33 PM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@...> wrote:

On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 13:45 -0800, Andre McCurdy wrote:

On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 1:20 PM Ross Burton <ross@...> wrote:

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 19:32, Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@...> wrote:

This isn't equivalent - it will cause a change in behaviour for anyone
using PACKAGECONFIG += "foo" from a .bbappend.

Correct, but this is likely the only recipe in the greater ecosystem
which has this behaviour, so I'm not that bothered to be honest. :)

The only recipe? There are many recipes which set a default
PACKAGECONFIG with ?= and many which set it with ??=. Your change is
effectively switching the vim recipe from one approach to the other.
The fact that adding PACKAGECONFIG options from a .bbappend with +=
sometimes works OK and sometimes not is a source of confusion for new
users.

You are right that no one seems to care though...

Some of us very much do care, it is actually bothering me a lot and I've posted
several times on the architecture list about this kind of issue.

We haven't worked out what we can agree to do about it though :(.

As a first, very easy, step, make a statement here on the mailing list
that all PACKAGECONFIG defaults should be assigned with ?= instead of
??= and fix the recipes in oe-core accordingly.

The question is whether we all agree on that and I'm not sure we all do.

What are the possible objections?

Any more feedback? The misconception that no one cares about improving
this could be because discussions on the topic always seem to peter
out leaving these unanswered questions.