Re: [edk2-devel] edk2 repo for RedfishPkg

["Sean" <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1583 bytes --]

I support somewhere other than edk2 core.

I would offer a third option to think about; create a new tianocore repo.  For optional features or features that don't have broad community adoption it would allow for those downstream consumers to easily pick and chose their consumption.  It also helps avoid "core" features becoming entangled or dependent on an optional features.  Current UiApp would be another great example.

Just my opinion.

Thanks
Sean


From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Abner Chang via groups.io
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2020 8:08 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io
Cc: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>; Wang, Nickle (HPS SW) <nickle.wang@hpe.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [edk2-devel] edk2 repo for RedfishPkg

Hi edk2 community members,
Per to the short discussion with Mike and Ray, we would like to know your opinions regard to which edk2 repo to accommodate  RedfishPkg, edk2/RedfshPkg or edk2-platforms/Features/RedfishPkg?
The current direction of edk2 open source is going to reduce the size and some features were moved to edk2-platform already (e.g. edk2-platforms/Features/Intel).
Although RedfishPkg is a FW core feature however not all of systems require this. For example, most of client systems don't need Redfish for the out of band management so far, maybe  later.
My current idea is put RedfishPkg under edk2-platforms/Features, however I am also fine with having this package to under edk2 repo.
What is your opinion? edk2 or edk2-platforms?

Thanks
Abner



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4400 bytes --]