[XFS SUMMIT] Virtual XFS Developer Meetings

["Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 03:25:16PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I propose that we hold our own virtual XFS developer summit.  Physical
> proximity is way too risky for the forseeable future, so let's make do
> with online discussions and conferencing.  LSFMM 2020 was officially
> cancelled a short time ago.
> 
> Unlike in-person events, we cannot pin everyone into a single time zone
> for an extended meeting, and we can't have a hallway BOF.  On the plus
> side, we can finally invite /everyone/ to the table!  Let's use this
> email thread to make a list of topics for future discussions.  I can
> think of a few topic categories to start:
> 
>  1. Development process problems that people would like to address.
>  2. Matching patch authors with patch reviewers.
>  3. Old features that we ought to retire.
>  4. New feature development roadmap.
>  5. Anything else that people think is important.
> 
> Once we have a list of specific topics matched with people who are
> interested in that topic, I think it best to start each of those
> conversations in separate threads on linux-xfs where everyone can see
> them.

Also, uh, please tag your subject lines with "[XFS SUMMIT]" (like I
didn't do) to make it easier to track the topic discussions.

--D

> If the participants feel that they'd get more out of an
> interactive session, we have plenty of options for doing that:
> 
> The first option of course is the IRC channel (#xfs on freenode) from
> which it is easy to paste the irc logs into linux-xfs for archiving and
> further public comment.
> 
> For actual video conferencing, we also have tools such as Jitsi,
> BigBlueButton, BlueJeans, and Zoom.  I'm willing to sit in on video
> meetings to take notes for linux-xfs and/or post the recordings online.
> As a side note for anyone wanting to take advantage of videochats --
> I'd prefer to keep this to one hourlong meeting per day.
> 
> Please remember this is not an edict passed on from high to shake up
> everything; it is merely this maintainer suggesting that we explore
> other tactics for building things together.  In the end, everything that
> goes into making decisions still must be communicated via linux-xfs, and
> patches still have to earn Reviewed-by tags.  We do, however, have
> flexibility in how we get there.
> 
> Here are some topics that have been mentioned to me at least in passing
> over the last few months.  I'll start the first five topics since
> they're the ones I was going to put on the agenda for an XFS meeting at
> LSFMM until that all blew away.
> 
>  - Refactoring the Review Process (me, Eric, Dave)
> 
>  - Deferred inode inactivation and nonblocking inode reclaim (me, Amir)
> 
>  - 64bit timestamps (me, Amir)
> 
>  - Atomic extent swaps (me)
> 
>  - Online fsck (me)
> 
>  - Deprecating the v4 format (Dave)
> 
>  - Parent Pointers (Amir)
> 
>  - Range Locks (Amir)
> 
>  - DAX bashing session (Dan)
> 
>  - Widening the inode fork extent counters (Chandan)
> 
>  - Dirty buffer region bitmap tracking (Chandan)
> 
>  - Add your pet item here! :)
> 
> Thoughts, suggestions, and flames appreciated!
> 
> --D