[yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: YP Compatible changes

[Osier-mixon, Jeffrey]

On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Otavio Salvador
<otavio at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Osier-mixon, Jeffrey
> <jeffrey.osier-mixon at intel.com> wrote:
> ...
>> New rules for member orgs vis a vis YP Compatible status:
>>
>> 1 - BSP or feature layers from member organizations only need to be
>> voted in once. After that, the
>> onus is on the sponsoring organization to make sure the layer stays
>> within the guidelines of the project.
>>
>> 2 - Every time the YP version changes, or the layer or project version
>> changes, the sponsoring org has to let me know (by filling out a form)
>> so the website can stay current. A special form will be created for
>> this purpose. This will have to be part of the release process, and
>> for layers we can also make this an automated way to add items to the
>> Downloads page on the website.
>>
>> 3 - If anyone complains about a layer/product being out of spec, the
>> sponsoring org has to respond within a few days and either propose a
>> fix or prove that the reporter is wrong. If neither of those things
>> happens, the layer/product comes off the list. It can go back on the
>> list, on probation, if the owner works it out with Richard's technical
>> organization, but not before.
> ...
>
> We could enforce a new review every two or three releases so we keep a
> formal review of the layer to check for any non-conform issue but
> alleviating the process; it does not need to trigger a new voting but
> a regular review is good for everyone, I think.

A periodic review, perhaps annually, might be a good idea, but this
gets into the resource issue. Who is going to perform these reviews?
The core team is already quite stretched as it is. What happens when
we have twice as many member orgs who all need these reviews?

Let's discuss options on Monday.

-- 
Jeff Osier-Mixon @Intel
Yocto Project Community Manager http://yoctoproject.org