From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1456C00144 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 01:23:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Lswyh3gDHz3c3m for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 11:23:24 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=aj.id.au header.i=@aj.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=gvgJlWrN; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=1eZNdr6/; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=aj.id.au (client-ip=64.147.123.21; helo=wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=andrew@aj.id.au; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=aj.id.au header.i=@aj.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=gvgJlWrN; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=1eZNdr6/; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Lswxr3M8Yz2yL6 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 11:22:39 +1000 (AEST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C86463200971; Tue, 26 Jul 2022 21:22:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap50 ([10.202.2.100]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 26 Jul 2022 21:22:35 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aj.id.au; h=cc :cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t= 1658884954; x=1658971354; bh=23P9kq4SSDaQiA/IkLvEcux9Qd8eNYSljBy TYhgCMDo=; b=gvgJlWrNJJhuWVQuCGDD/c5yXB7/bYC7NnLMjy6GAdZzUY9yrMn k56Co7PsGxdrbh+aGtkYtgSspYUNILW7kB8tepalMZz+kcnzADV7VcdKbk6TlFH0 A1ZaxtMhjShQRNvP6X4eUyF2Zdfu02tU3wRpX8VAkuzpxc7r29lKmpL5Y8aQmHGc Q4j/6hRSiOoxKoWwUUnA8Lj59bpPvA9xuTM5ndmehTJhyL7QP6bMJQfavZY+97DA Xg+vQ6EmT5BMUBfT7OO89yhpXyKvOkUQweFKde4bsNpmoXSdZKt9wEs9ROF6NWYH qdD64fLExTKuukjcfJqwd/u+N8d9pJJS8vA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1658884954; x= 1658971354; bh=23P9kq4SSDaQiA/IkLvEcux9Qd8eNYSljByTYhgCMDo=; b=1 eZNdr6/Qc79xucXHu7rI7/n312QqNAo1iA/kW5DtHKMTmWP/nBez4xgNFIzMKy2a k4okalrcRSlVBBOgTr4ZHks+4+E78EbYpUXVUgetpRAxH69cFldLR9FYF6jEtvXo ew3GGbtElYb0J/3QLOgntO1+vFQzNPvyuYyick1nsSaS8gy0nh9kPFs+TzIxKR7u NhF5ISOsbmHb/lcJbTgziUSsw3V/BN3EQd/AUrhyGgr8NDuOrN/xkCdqQ4WQ39oO UAQ9VcjfUCuO42rF494L3JbgP2p6RzVbMSsfxe5OLAyg9wzpipSflieObu6ATTOf Z7EQTcvKGYjA6JfM/hwrA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrvdduuddggeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkfffhvfevufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedftehnughr vgifucflvghffhgvrhihfdcuoegrnhgurhgvfiesrghjrdhiugdrrghuqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpeevgefgieelheeffeffkeelgffgteffjeeiieevueeitefgfefghfduhfek ffehffenucffohhmrghinhepkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenuc evlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrnhgurhgv fiesrghjrdhiugdrrghu X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: idfb84289:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 58604170007E; Tue, 26 Jul 2022 21:22:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-757-gc3ad9c75d3-fm-20220722.001-gc3ad9c75 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <3df049fc-e5ec-449e-b696-a2ca86c37ed3@www.fastmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2022 10:52:04 +0930 From: "Andrew Jeffery" To: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Can we improve the experience of working on OpenBMC? Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Benjamin Fair , Ed Tanous , Brad Bishop , Heyi Guo , jebr@google.com, scody@google.com Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" 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 2. Minimise reviews required to get a given feature or fix integrated into the distro build 3. Make fork maintenance easy 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 8. Support inclusive naming # 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 3. Querying design/implementation/bug properties across the project is hard 4. Coordinating breaking changes is hard 5. Coordinating tree-wide changes is hard 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