From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f178.google.com (mail-ig0-f178.google.com [209.85.213.178]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95B236A463 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 15:07:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ig0-f178.google.com with SMTP id ut6so7769165igb.5 for ; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 07:07:21 -0800 (PST) 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 :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=BIeNGozjG/h1Wn8gRgDjh+ZUMLyTXJpO4sd5I82yT2M=; b=g7IyBVaowSiLxpqqLjI03m1xYi2VF+tEKn48aDx22fcO0Ih8w1kqo40BzAOCpctEji UL2yvFLG/kxZcudbv7nIKPuBT4P1rcwdq85laZPRLm1GqlbmznI8zdCMcAm6wMMg5Krg i1NtwPi7wgLbget2U2PmQ2OsWqg1HBleouKRS1Cfkc9GMNUzCglJZ9TAZgNj6K63JGxl Ib7+p/1S7tz1HsKz9U/3Tyy0q6BGatpIKDFysrTbKa1LGfMmrQIFKpe9uoDNjAEdb6Uk laT+5W949owUQoeJ1KY3MuKGWu3O3ZDcWCQekv042WhNRisKg5SiJRmSg0lxJh6bPY0b 7GcQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlDMp2sjweKzuD3TNKVeCWfztssNbjx08BpUOfmWhfkb3DSYdfIMJ7ZhiSjl5nq2uGWN0O+ X-Received: by 10.50.12.103 with SMTP id x7mr3898560igb.11.1389280041342; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 07:07:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.141.83] (69-165-220-158.dsl.teksavvy.com. [69.165.220.158]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id l7sm8163183igx.2.2014.01.09.07.07.19 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Jan 2014 07:07:20 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52CEBB27.10709@linaro.org> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 10:07:19 -0500 From: Trevor Woerner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <52CDDD3E.7040508@linaro.org> <52CE8075.8040700@communistcode.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <52CE8075.8040700@communistcode.co.uk> Subject: Re: bug scrub - RFC X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:07:21 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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.