All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brad Bishop <bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com>
To: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
Cc: Benjamin Fair <benjaminfair@google.com>,
	openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org, Ed Tanous <edtanous@google.com>,
	Heyi Guo <guoheyi@linux.alibaba.com>,
	jebr@google.com, scody@google.com
Subject: Re: Can we improve the experience of working on OpenBMC?
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 20:10:58 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220729001058.ec2fpmjrrkn75bf7@cheese> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3df049fc-e5ec-449e-b696-a2ca86c37ed3@www.fastmail.com>

Hi Andrew, thanks for poking at this.

On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 10:52:04AM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
>Hello everyone,
>
>A few months back Ed kicked off a thread about changing how we work on OpenBMC
>with the aim to improve the development rate and make it easier to on-board
>people to the project:
>
>https://lore.kernel.org/openbmc/CAH2-KxAJS_U8=meCxp8ue7n0bmnzeRpyZOPZpy0h1cFEbbz-HA@mail.gmail.com/
>
>I felt that discussion splintered a bit, with a lot of back-and-forth about
>details well down in the weeds. I found this hard to follow, and so put in some
>work to try synthesise the discussion into desires for improving how we work,
>and practical problems with what we do currently.
>
>Below are the lists of these desires and problems. I think it would be good to
>treat this as a survey to understand who feels strongly about what.
>
>If you want to express support for a point then add a +1 below it. Feel free to
>suggest new items for either list, or to further discuss a particular item
>below its entry.
>
>I feel that with information on what people feel strongly about we can
>prioritise what we need address and work forwards from there.
>
>For the record, the mind map that I used to generate these lists is here, which
>contains further quotes and references to the original discussion thread:
>
>https://github.com/amboar/openbmc-monorepo-discussion
>
>Some of these might be closely related or considered duplicates of other list
>items, but based on the discussions referenced above I felt they were distinct
>enough to warrant separate entries.
>
># Desires
>
>1. Easy sharing of a broad set of application and distro changes

+1

>2. Minimise reviews required to get a given feature or fix integrated into the distro build

+1

>3. Make fork maintenance easy

+1

>4. Provide one place to report bugs across the entire project
>5. Minimise effort collecting project statistics
>6. Make it easy to add new applications
>7. Make it easy to refactor across the entire project

+1

>8. Support inclusive naming

+1

>
># Problems
>
>1. Yocto is hard
>    1. Managing patch stacks is hard
>    2. Yocto-specific tooling is hard
>    3. Finding the right recipe file to inspect/modify is hard
>    4. Yocto has too much documentation
>2. OpenBMC has too much documentation

🙂 Really? 

>3. Querying design/implementation/bug properties across the project is hard

+1

>4. Coordinating breaking changes is hard

+1

>5. Coordinating tree-wide changes is hard

+1

>6. Identifying the right repo to file a bug against is hard
>7. Transferring bugs between repos is hard
>8. Bug reports are duplicated across repos
>9. Bug reports are ignored
>10. Working out where to submit a patch is hard
>11. Getting patches reviewed is hard
>12. New repo requests are bottle-necked
>
>Cheers,
>
>Andrew

  reply	other threads:[~2022-07-29  0:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-07-27  1:22 Can we improve the experience of working on OpenBMC? Andrew Jeffery
2022-07-29  0:10 ` Brad Bishop [this message]
2022-07-29  2:21   ` Andrew Jeffery
2022-08-01 21:34   ` Ed Tanous
2022-08-01 21:27 ` Alexander Amelkin
2022-08-01 21:39   ` Ed Tanous
2022-08-01 22:03     ` Alexander Amelkin
2022-08-09  3:42     ` Andrew Jeffery
2022-08-09  0:44   ` Andrew Jeffery
2022-08-09  8:08 ` Jiaqing Zhao

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20220729001058.ec2fpmjrrkn75bf7@cheese \
    --to=bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com \
    --cc=andrew@aj.id.au \
    --cc=benjaminfair@google.com \
    --cc=edtanous@google.com \
    --cc=guoheyi@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=jebr@google.com \
    --cc=openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=scody@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.