From: Trevor Woerner <trevor.woerner@linaro.org>
To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: bug scrub - RFC
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 10:07:19 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52CEBB27.10709@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52CE8075.8040700@communistcode.co.uk>
On 01/09/14 05:56, Jack Mitchell wrote:
> On 08/01/14 23:20, Trevor Woerner wrote:
>> questions:
>> 1) Currently it has been suggested this should be a 2-day event, should
>> these two days be during the week or over a weekend? In either case,
>> which 2 days?
>>
> If it's two days long then why don't you do the best of both worlds and
> have a Friday/Saturday or Sunday/Monday combination?
I was thinking of doing it either fully during the week, or fully on a
weekend since my feeling is that most people either work with OE/Yocto
during the weekdays or on the weekend. There's nothing to say we
couldn't run this "bug scrub" during the week, then run a second "bug
scrub" 2 months from now on a weekend (or visa versa).
>> 2) Since this is an OE event, should it focus only on OE bugs[2], or
>> should it be generalized for any bug?
> I don't think we should be limiting people to what they can work on
> while "participating".
Since this is an OE TSC event I didn't want any hard feelings ;-) I also
thought that maybe it would be easier to get people interested if this
"bug scrub" was targeted at a specific project. I thought there's a
chance it might help get people interested if we said "let's have a bug
event where we target these 30 bugs" instead of saying "there are 1000's
of bugs in the bugzilla, pick one and try to do something about it".
>> 4) It would be cool to be able to provide incentives to help people get
>> interested and contributing to knocking some bugs around. So if anyone
>> (*cough* Intel) has any neat hardware (*cough* Galileo, Edison) they
>> could offer as an incentive (or, conversely, if there's a board you'd
>> like to see Yocto target) please see about making that happen.
>>
> A unified effort towards a "new trendy" board would be a fun goal, but I
> worry that hardware teething issues would then eat up run of the mill
> bug fixing time, handouts for participation however, (bug fixed/reviewed
> by/tested by) would be a great idea.
>
Sorry, yes, this is what I meant.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-09 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-08 23:20 bug scrub - RFC Trevor Woerner
2014-01-09 10:56 ` Jack Mitchell
2014-01-09 15:07 ` Trevor Woerner [this message]
2014-01-09 15:34 ` Otavio Salvador
2014-01-09 15:38 ` Trevor Woerner
2014-01-10 2:47 ` Philip Balister
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=52CEBB27.10709@linaro.org \
--to=trevor.woerner@linaro.org \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox