From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pb0-f42.google.com (mail-pb0-f42.google.com [209.85.160.42]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E791BE00BC8 for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 13:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f42.google.com with SMTP id rr13so6015308pbb.1 for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 13:45:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=eGCOigswQGRF7Ih5GbHZhGL2eCfOrx5bvk8Ok1aLhMs=; b=fVT91yl9maeWwAyHBnu5mfV9N3pj7jQbUEQgsMGxOHA3+Rt7uN26BKq2HtjzWcBGL4 JKvi5YejmLnBuKxoD8VACUCuFm4fnYm5xh7480hHpRPcmQMZ0NbRLFTj+L0Grq1EGKmm f9hceqbRqqXgsn4VmG2aWQlDSkLrCk4qlSA18fKKNmi102xEqfADn3e7ZLyBAFxSvcFs JqWcRstDZp/RkmVKaHF8uWoN09nnpFxAtBGDv1n35RZO1jMCKxF0Wcu6JADJC+yH4Bn7 HdbICrRmSJucBMC217iCuap5d4iCZbkrpz6oUOjAewty/Gmf6trliyM5bfDrfannbs0T VgGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmwzfAN99iP2TpWLa99vz5I+EtF0Fgz2ZkilVfA6OCcWxefJK3+H2wY4GliNq7xwVukXpT2 X-Received: by 10.68.138.227 with SMTP id qt3mr19595890pbb.6.1395693914838; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 13:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [29.6.1.5] ([63.226.49.26]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id pq3sm35165045pbb.57.2014.03.24.13.45.12 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 24 Mar 2014 13:45:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53309957.7040502@boundarydevices.com> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 13:45:11 -0700 From: Eric Nelson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Otavio Salvador References: <1395261322-14905-1-git-send-email-eric.nelson@boundarydevices.com> <73259f17c01648dbb65e768113c90f58@BY2PR03MB379.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <5330563A.9070404@boundarydevices.com> In-Reply-To: Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: Call for maintainers (was [RFC PATCH] fsl-commity-bsp: Add meta-qt5) X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:45:17 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Otavio, On 03/24/2014 09:55 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Eric Nelson > wrote: >> Hi Otavio, >> >> Since we have diverged off the topic again, I changed the >> subject line to invite more folks to chime in. >> >> On 03/24/2014 07:26 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Daiane.Angolini@freescale.com >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure we ought to include it or not. I see valid points for both >>>>> and I will focus my answer in the cons: >>>>> >>>>> * Documentation: our Release Notes, User Guide and FAQ are still >>>>> uncomplete. Add new stuff will only make it worse as those will also >>>>> need >>>>> to be documented. >>>>> >>>>> * Tests: We see limited tests using the images we have and people does >>>>> not >>>>> provide much feedback when we open the test form. More things will only >>>>> complicate it more. >>>> >>>> >>>> Until here I understand. And I agree. >>>> >>>>> * Size: more metadata means more updates and maintenance. We need more >>>>> people helping the metadata maintenance before extend it. >>>> >>>> >>>> We already have almost 100% of the boards with maintainers. What do you >>>> mean, when you >>>> say we need more maintenance before extend the metadata? >>>> >>>> I still don´t have a clear idea if I like or dislike the idea of >>>> downloading more meta layers by default. >>>> >>>> I´m still deciding ;) >>> >>> >>> We need to split the maintainership areas: >>> >>> * boards: Yes, most of board has someone committed nowadays and this >>> is awesome. This help us to get tests and feedback from those boards >>> and more people to help to address board specific things. However this >>> does not address the rest of meta-fsl-arm ... >>> >>> * core BSP support: here we have some people working. You and me has >>> been doing most of work until now and Lauren has been started to >>> contribute more to this since Freescale started to work in the >>> 3.10.17-1.0.0 BSP. Here we need a lot of help and it does affect >>> /every/ board we use/add/maintain ... >> >> These are areas where both carrots and sticks might help. It seems >> very reasonable to ask each board maintainer to update and test >> against some set of target images within a certain time period. > > > Part of this has been addressed by the Test Form, which has been done > and maintained mainly by Daiane which try to make clear what we intend > to support during the release. > > However I agree we may need a more frequent test to fully address > this and here I am out of ideas. So do you have any idea how we can > improve on this regard? > I don't have any fully-baked ideas, but I think there's some value is laying out expectations. >>> * technology specific support: here is where we are beginning. This >>> involves a lot of commitment and time. Here is where Qt5 and Chromium >>> are going to be covered. Currently we have no one really committed to >>> either and we cannot supply something in FSL Community BSP which is >>> not /maintained/ and for maintained I mean someone watching it and >>> doing the rework/improvements/commitments need for it to keep working >>> when Qt5 5.3 or Chromium 40 is released. >> >> I think you're under-stating the issue here, since there are many >> more bits than just Qt5 and Chromium. > > Of course; the idea here was to elucidate two more known and often > asked examples... > Sorry if that came across badly. I was just making the point that a lot more specificity would help here. >> Just off the top of my head: >> >> - Is anybody testing DirectFB on a regular basis? (seems a question >> on the ML today), > > This is supported by Freescale so I assume they are doing those tests. > Okay. I didn't know (and perhaps haven't read all of the documentation). >> - Up until the recent addition of , there weren't any easy-buttons for >> testing the gstreamer plugins in a non-X environment, and > > Here again we need to split this: > > Freescale 0.10 plugins: this is official material from Freescale and I > expect those to be tested by them. For example gplay makes it more or > less easy to use this. > Right. > gstreamer-imx (1.0): Carlos has been doing an awesome job here but he > cannot do all himself and as a community we ought to help here. We > need to think how to improve this and I am open for ideas here... > Agreed. > packagegroup-fsl-*, fsl-image-machine-test: Rogerio Nunes has started > an images rework which provides a much better base for test, reuse > and long term maintenance... > > ... however I know that you have this background information so this > point is not clear to me. What you mean here exactly? > I was just making the point that a broader conversation (with more specifics) was appropriate. >> - There's Wayland activity, but AFAIK, no image available to take >> advantage of it. > > It is still not integrated in meta-fsl-arm. The patches are being > worked out and we ought to have it integrated soon, however, as > DirectFB this is something Freescale officially supports so we can > rely on them for tests. > Cool. Again, I'm just throwing some bombs here to prod the conversation (and brainstorm a bit) about what/where/how we can get others to take some responsibility for the parts here. And when I say others, I include myself in the mix. >>> So it is a extensive topic; I hope it is clear now why I see we need >>> more people involved to grow. >> >> I feel like I've thrown a couple of bricks in the last week (Chromium >> and Qt5), but I hope they can be constructive. >> >> I do think that the questions you raise are worthy of a separate set of >> discussions (or at least a separate e-mail chain). >> >> Since there are a lot of different, interested parties with different >> agendas, I wonder whether a different (more interactive) forum might >> be a better match. >> >> Conference call? Google Hangout meeting? > > Yes; I think a Google Hangout would fit perfectly fine here. Some > people has suggested it privately in past but our community was still > too small for it to make sense. I think we are big enough for it to be > worth it and I am supportive to the idea. > > What others think? > >> I'm sure it's too late to schedule anything at FTF, but perhaps not. >> I'm also sure that there will be those interested in the topic who >> won't be attending. > > Sure. I will send an e-mail about FTF later today and I think it is a > great place for us to meet and discuss some of those points > face-to-face as the FTF and the Google Hangout allow more interactive > discussion but this all needs to be summarised here, in the mailing > list, for a final decision. > That makes sense to me. Communities only work if there's commitment to some effort from all involved. Regards, Eric