From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: agustin.benito@codethink.co.uk (Agustin Benito Bethencourt)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 10:45:52 +0100
Subject: [cip-dev] f2f meeting at ELCE 2016 summary
In-Reply-To: <58175643.30607@codethink.co.uk>
References: <58175643.30607@codethink.co.uk>
Message-ID: <581B0750.5070601@codethink.co.uk>
To: cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org
List-Id: cip-dev.lists.cip-project.org

Hi,

On 31/10/16 15:33, Agustin Benito Bethencourt wrote:
> Dear CIP friends,
>
> At ELCE Thursday Oct 13th, the CIP group had a f2f meeting. After having
> lunch together, Board members met for about an hour. After that the rest
> of the members joined and discussed the following topics for over an hour:

The ELCE 2016 video of the CIP talk has been published: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcL2rc2o8-4&index=123&list=PLbzoR-pLrL6pRFP6SOywVJWdEHlmQE51q

I added it to the events page of the wiki: 
https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/civilinfrastructureplatform/cipconferences

>
> ++ 4.4 kernel repository
>
> * During the event was announced that the first CIP kernel will be 4.4.
> At the meeting we clarified where to have the repository for that kernel.
> ** In the past, we reached the consensus to stay as close to the kernel
> community as possible. Following this approach, there is a consensus at
> CIP on using kernel.org as the working place for the kernel. The Linux
> Foundation fully supports this decision.
>
> * The general idea is to have the working repositories where it make
> sense and mirror them all in a central place.
>
> * CIP will use by default the Linux kernel tools/process to
> submit/review patches.
> ** We are currently discussing the general maintainership policies.
>
> ++ Other tools. Repositories mirrors
>
> * As mirroring tool we will use Gitlab (as a service for now).
> ** As a key advantage it was stated that this tool can be set behind the
> firewall which for big corporations can make a difference in getting
> internal traction towards working in the open. Feature wise, Gitlab has
> what CIP needs.
>
> * Gitlab will be use for additional required software beyond the kernel.
> ** When the account is set up, we will announce it.
>
> ++ CIP platforms
>
> * The goal of the discussion was to find a common ground we all can
> share, assuming each member will focus most of their energy on those
> platforms used in production.
>
> * CIP basic requirements for selecting a platform:
> ** At least one ARM and one Intel board
> ** At least one low cost development board for each architecture.
> ** No matter what CIP chooses, the list can be increased when consensus
> is reached.
> ** If any SoC joins CIP, we will obviously strongly consider adding
> their boards to the list.
>
> * The boards selected at this point are:
> ** Beaglebone Black (TI Sitara 335x). This is a low cost board we
> reached consensus upon.
> ** Altera Cyclone V. CIP will figure out some details about how to
> handle off-tree code from it.
>
> * The discussion around other boards is still ongoing.
>
> ++ Delivery (release) model
>
> * When do we plan to release the platform? How?
> ** Agustin Benito Bethencourt (Codethink) will present a proposal to CIP
> about this to start the discussion.
>
> ++ Whitepaper
>
> * Since CIP was announced, in April 2016, the Group has reached
> consensus in several fundamental topics. For this reason, we agreed to
> write a Whitepaper to describe the current status and considerations of
> the CIP project.
>
> * Current main consensus points are summarised in the CIP slides
> presented at various events. The idea is to move from there to a document.
>
> * CIP group will start working on this topic as soon as possible.
>
> ++ 2017 CIP roadmap
>
> * In order to define 2017 activity, CIP decided to pick up some key
> dates an plan milestones around them.
> ** Consensus was reached around  ELC, LinuxCon Japan and ELCE, based on
> the experience from 2016.
>
> Best Regards

-- 
Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink
agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk