[yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: April meeting minutes & new member info

Fri Apr 22 13:02:21 PDT 2016

Two options maybe? :

- get enough $ to fund the work
- get enough help (read "committed people / engineers / marketeers ") from the participating organizations to do the work 

Linaro has a similar model in place - membership fee + engineers. 

Conf call is definitely better.

D

________________________________________
From: yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org [yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org] on behalf of William Mills [wmills at ti.com]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 12:49 PM
To: Jeff Osier-Mixon; Justin Waters
Cc: yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: April meeting minutes & new member info

>>> I am doing my best to influence changes within  MontaVista.
>>>
>>> - armin

No worries Armin.  I know the members in the project are working with
good intent.  I think we just need to reset management expectations on
the true cost of this project.  In my own company it is a heck of a lot
easier to get $5K to travel to meetings in EU or Asia but try to
allocate $5K for an external software project is a major pitch.

On 04/22/2016 02:16 PM, Jeff Osier-Mixon wrote:
> This is an excellent question. The answer right now is no, we don't -
> we have so far left it up to individual organizations to decide the
> level at which they want to participate. This is different from LF's
> process of deciding solely based on organization size because we
> didn't want to prevent anyone from joining if, as has happened, YP is
> being used by a team of 30 people in a company of 10,000. Should we
> base their scale on the group or the company, knowing we won't get
> them as members in the latter case?

Even in the LF model, the org chooses the level.  However the dues at
[some?] levels are based on company size.

Jeffro: can you get the sliding scale LF uses for Silver membership?
If need be share this info on the yocto-ab-private list.

> So we have left that decision to
> the member themselves. As a result we have several very large
> companies at Silver level, but I believe they are companies we would
> not have at all otherwise. It might make sense at this point, 5 1/2
> years in, to create a table outlining expectations of membership
> level, participation, etc.
>
> I would suggest that if the project directly benefits the bottom line,
> an organization owes it to itself to participate and help guide the
> direction of the project. Thus, any company that relies on YP as an
> upstream or as a resource to support their own products (e.g. if they
> host a BSP layer) should be expected to join at the highest level they
> can reasonably afford, because YP is critical to their business. That
> said, each org has its own definition of what it can afford. In the
> guidelines for YP Participant status, we outlined large vs. small as
> being around 80 employees, on the theory that any company larger than
> that would have the resources to at least join as Silver.
>

If the size criteria gets too sticky, we also talked about adding a
Bronze level or AB votes for reduced dues to companies we explicitly
want in the project.

With 3 (Platinum, Gold, Silver) or 4 (+Bronze) levels we definitely need
to make the membership level more prominent on the website.  I
understand this has some down sides but at the end of the day this is
the biggest "get" from a higher level; recognition that you are a major
supporter to YP.

> It is also worth noting that every change we make in our guidelines
> ripples through the pipeline of organizations interested in joining.
>
> It might be most expedient for someone or a small sub-group to come up
> with a strawman proposal for us to alter. Any volunteers?
>

I am happy to work in this group.  I would prefer to do it on a conf
call.  We have tried to the e-mail list route a couple times and I am
not convinced we will close this way.

> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Justin Waters
> <justin.waters at timesys.com> wrote:
>> Do we have clear guidelines as to who we would consider good candidates for
>> each membership level? As in, size of company, dependence on Yocto for their
>> products, etc?
>>
>> Having a document or table like this would give us a couple of things: 1)
>> Something to take to upper management to make the case that a higher level
>> of participation is warranted, and b) that the expectations are consistent
>> and fair to everyone involved.
>>
>> I think we have a good enough sample size of members to pull some numbers
>> together. And it would help clarify who we consider "large" and who we
>> consider "small".
>>
>> -Justin
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:35 PM, akuster <akuster at mvista.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/19/2016 07:42 AM, William Mills wrote:
>>>> I have no issue giving small companies a price break in some way (Bronze
>>>> or sliding silver).
>>>> However, expecting Gold members to take up all the slack and larger
>>>> SIlver members pay nothing extra is not acceptable to TI.
>>>
>>> As I am with one of those larger Silver members that pay nothing extra,
>>> I understand your frustration and share your frustration.
>>>
>>> I am doing my best to influence changes within  MontaVista.
>>>
>>> - armin
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 04/18/2016 01:39 PM, Jeff Osier-Mixon wrote:
>>>>> It is worth mentioning that there are other possibilities as well.
>>>>> Here are some ideas:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Bronze level at a lower price point
>>>>> - Sliding scale for Silver based on company size, say 5k - 20k
>>>>> - Dues increase only for Gold, not for Silver
>>>>> - Dues increase to 60k for Gold, 0 for Silver
>>>>>
>>>>> There are pros and cons for each of these. We need to keep in mind
>>>>> that the goal is to keep the project fully funded, to keep the
>>>>> documentation production at its normal rate, and to keep member value
>>>>> high.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Erway, Tracey M
>>>>> <tracey.m.erway at intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Jefro corrected me:  "Dues are billed annually in January, so we can't
>>>>>> raise them in 2016. We asked people to donate spare cash, as Renesas did."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org
>>>>>> [mailto:yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Erway, Tracey M
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:55 AM
>>>>>> To: Jeff Osier-Mixon; yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: April meeting minutes & new
>>>>>> member info
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The purpose of upping the dues was to cover this year's shortfall.  We
>>>>>> need a solution that raises funds in the immediate timeframe, so future
>>>>>> guidelines will not address the issue.
>>>>>> /t
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org
>>>>>> [mailto:yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Osier-Mixon
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:50 AM
>>>>>> To: yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: April meeting minutes & new
>>>>>> member info
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi again - I'm following up on the potential dues increase in 2017. I
>>>>>> had a conversation with Otavio this morning, and he suggested that some of
>>>>>> the Silver members might have a great deal of difficulty with a 50% increase
>>>>>> in dues, especially as they are all currently paying for LF corporate
>>>>>> membership as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I propose that we consider keeping Silver at 10k annually, but placing
>>>>>> stronger guidelines on which organizations can join as Silver.
>>>>>> Alternatively, we could reopen the discussion about Bronze level. I
>>>>>> think it is paramount to the community to have an affordable participation
>>>>>> level that still has access to YP Compatible status.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts welcome
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Jeff Osier-Mixon <jefro at jefro.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Note to new members - I have tried to add information in these
>>>>>>> minutes
>>>>>>> to help explain the roles of each of the groups within the project,
>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>> these minutes are quite long but hopefully informative.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yocto Project Advisory Board
>>>>>>> Wed April 6, 2016
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Attendees:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tracey Erway, Intel
>>>>>>> Cyril Chemparathy, Xilinx
>>>>>>> Justin Waters, Timesys
>>>>>>> Bill Mills, TI
>>>>>>> Chris Hallinan, Mentor Graphics
>>>>>>> Armin Kuster, MontaVista
>>>>>>> Munakata-san, Renesas
>>>>>>> Stu Grossman. Juniper
>>>>>>> Tyler Baker, Linaro
>>>>>>> Philip Balister, OpenEmbedded
>>>>>>> Jeff Osier-Mixon, YP/Intel
>>>>>>> Lieu Ta, Wind River
>>>>>>> Richard Purdie, YP
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I missed your name on the attendee list, please let me know. We
>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>> have a quorum and were able to vote in the meeting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _____________________________________________________
>>>>>>> New Members & Special Thanks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The project welcomed new members Linaro and Xilinx, as well as
>>>>>>> returning member Timesys. Thanks for being part of the Yocto Project!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Special thanks to Renesas, who donated cash in Q1 to help pay for
>>>>>>> documentation and Developer Day, and to Intel, who also donated cash
>>>>>>> in Q1 to help pay for documentation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _____________________________________________________
>>>>>>> Budget
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lieu Ta from Wind River is responsible for Finance within the
>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The project has an annual budget of approximately US$400k. With this
>>>>>>> budget, we pay for the following categories of expenses, with 2015
>>>>>>> percentages shown:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Infrastructure (66%): physical and network infrastructure,
>>>>>>> including
>>>>>>> build systems and servers, and systems administrator.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Operations (15%): basic project operations, including legal as well
>>>>>>> as 15% overhead to LF
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Advocacy (13%): activities often provided by marketing
>>>>>>> organizations, including collateral, public relations, outbound
>>>>>>> communications, and event coverage.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Documentation (5%): we pay a contract technical writer to create
>>>>>>> documentation for the project. (This expense is expected to grow
>>>>>>> significantly in 2016)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Community (1%): this budget covers gaps, including meeting
>>>>>>> expenses,
>>>>>>> donations to related organizations like OpenEmbedded, paid
>>>>>>> internships
>>>>>>> such as Outreachy, and occasionally travel for specific vital
>>>>>>> personnel to important gatherings.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lieu presented the results of the 2015 budget. Income and expenses
>>>>>>> were very nearly on par, with a small shortfall due to documentation
>>>>>>> expenses. The 2015 figures are currently posted on the wiki at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Yocto_Project_Finances
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We discussed the ongoing 2016 budget, which is expecting some notable
>>>>>>> shortfalls primarily due to the project taking on the cost of
>>>>>>> documentation, expected to cost $120k-150k/year. We also discussed
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> 2017 budget. This discussion is presented later in these minutes as
>>>>>>> part of the discussion about membership and business development.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _____________________________________________________
>>>>>>> Advocacy & Events
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tracey Erway from Intel leads the Advocacy effort for YP, with help
>>>>>>> from the Advocacy team.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tracey presented a summary of advocacy activities, including events,
>>>>>>> giveaways, Developer Day training sessions, and the backgrounder that
>>>>>>> was finished last year. She also mentioned that YP currently has 80%
>>>>>>> of the commercial embedded linux OS market share, which is great news
>>>>>>> indeed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In 2015 we attended and sponsored ELC and ELCE, and also added SCaLE
>>>>>>> in early 2016 along with a free-to-attend introductory training
>>>>>>> session, or "mini-DevDay" event, with training provided by LF
>>>>>>> Training.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Developer Day US 2015 in San Jose was actually profitable due to the
>>>>>>> efforts of Mentor Graphics and the donation of their facility. Both
>>>>>>> DevDays were greatly enhanced by the donation and subsequent giveaway
>>>>>>> of a great deal of hardware from Intel, TI, and TechNexion, as well
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> SanDisk. DevDay US 2016 was made possible by a large cash donation
>>>>>>> from Renesas as well as hardware donations from Linaro, TI, and
>>>>>>> Intel.
>>>>>>> All DevDay sessions are driven by the tireless effort of many
>>>>>>> volunteer speakers, classroom helpers, and organizers to reach
>>>>>>> 150-200
>>>>>>> students directly each year, who then take that knowledge back to
>>>>>>> their companies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andreea completed work on the YP backgrounder, a brochure with two
>>>>>>> versions that is available in the YP booth at all events. PDF
>>>>>>> versions
>>>>>>> have been sent to all member organizations so they can print it and
>>>>>>> bring it to events that YP does not sponsor. The longer of the two,
>>>>>>> which contains profiles of each organization that contributed now
>>>>>>> needs to be updated because of our new members, but the smaller
>>>>>>> version still works just fine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tracey identified the website as a primary need. It needs to be
>>>>>>> refreshed with an easier to read front page, a regular blog, and
>>>>>>> better information flow for new users. Several people have
>>>>>>> volunteered
>>>>>>> ideas - at this point what is needed is funding and resources to make
>>>>>>> it happen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bill Mills cautioned the organization to not be too marketing driven,
>>>>>>> which we discussed as a group.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jefro congratulated the Advocacy team for getting so much done on
>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>> a small budget.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _____________________________________________________
>>>>>>> Infrastructure
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael Halstead is a systems administrator who started with YP in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> very early days as a contractor. He is now an employee at Linux
>>>>>>> Foundation working solely on YP. His salary as well as all the
>>>>>>> servers
>>>>>>> and infrastructure he works on come from this budget.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael gave a rundown on our infrastructure, particularly the build
>>>>>>> machines and autobuilders he manages along with the servers,
>>>>>>> particularly the git server and all community assets such as the
>>>>>>> mailing lists, wiki, and bugzilla.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _____________________________________________________
>>>>>>> Documentation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Scott Rifenbark is the project's technical writer. He sometimes works
>>>>>>> in conjunction with other resources donated by member organizations,
>>>>>>> particularly Intel. Scott has been with the project since before its
>>>>>>> launch in 2010. He previously worked as an Intel employee, but since
>>>>>>> fall 2015 he has been contracted to the project through LF.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since documentation is one of the primary value adds that the project
>>>>>>> provides to its members, this is an important resource to hang onto.
>>>>>>> We have paid for Scott's work to date by donations from member
>>>>>>> organizations, particularly Intel and Renesas. If documentation is
>>>>>>> important to you, please consider donating for this budget
>>>>>>> specifically.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To pay for documentation, the Advisory Board discussed three major
>>>>>>> funding ideas, which are covered next.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _____________________________________________________
>>>>>>> Business Development and Membership
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The project has had between 17 and 20 members for most of its
>>>>>>> existence, and while the budget has always been one of the smallest
>>>>>>> among the LF Collaborative Projects, we have provided quite a lot of
>>>>>>> value to the members and to the general public with what we had. It
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> noteworthy that the project has been self-sustaining for nearly all
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the five years it has existed, and we want to continue that success
>>>>>>> going forward.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Given the expenses and income the project expects for 2016,
>>>>>>> particularly the added load of documentation, we discussed at length
>>>>>>> ways to increase the available funds through business development and
>>>>>>> membership dues.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We settled on five specific actions:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Establish a new membership level: Platinum, with dues of 100k (or
>>>>>>> more). Each Platinum member gets two votes on the Advisory Board.
>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>> is effective immediately, and any member organization can switch to
>>>>>>> Platinum at any time. Each member org is tasked with the action to
>>>>>>> pitch this membership level to their management structure to see if
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> is feasible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Propose to raise dues starting in 2017. The current proposal is to
>>>>>>> move Gold members to 55k per year, an increase of 10k, and Silver
>>>>>>> members to 15k per year, an increase of 5k. Each member org is tasked
>>>>>>> with the action to let their organizations know this increase has
>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>> proposed and to report back to the group in May.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Become more active and involved as a group in recruiting new member
>>>>>>> organizations. To that end, several members are interested in
>>>>>>> exploring the new member pipeline and also in looking to their own
>>>>>>> network of partners to expand project membership.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - A potential non-voting Bronze level was also discussed, with
>>>>>>> potential dues of 1k to 5k and various member values and potential
>>>>>>> restrictions. However, this would provide minimal benefit to the
>>>>>>> project, so it was decided instead to establish a YP Supporter level
>>>>>>> to recognize anyone who donates any amount to the project lower than
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> Silver membership. Jefro will follow up on how this recognition is to
>>>>>>> be done, including a provisional YP Supporter badge similar to YP
>>>>>>> Participant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - We also discussed establishing clearer guidelines on member value,
>>>>>>> especially in terms of access to the primary YP git server at
>>>>>>> git.yoctoproject.org. The team has an action to review the current
>>>>>>> tree of layers available on the git server so that more valuable
>>>>>>> layers will be more prominent. It was noted that some hosted hardware
>>>>>>> layers are not represented by the companies who produce the hardware,
>>>>>>> so the team agreed to approach those companies for silver membership,
>>>>>>> and potentially to formalize autobuilder access and QA support as
>>>>>>> member benefits. RP has the lead responsibility for these things,
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> Jefro planning to help.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Along those same lines, the BSP layer definition was planned to be
>>>>>>> discussed at the OpenEmbedded meeting later in the week. RP agreed to
>>>>>>> discuss BSPs in more detail at th enext Advisory Board meeting in
>>>>>>> May.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tracey offered to write up some of the data she has access to in
>>>>>>> terms
>>>>>>> of market share so that members can use it to promote YP inside their
>>>>>>> own organizations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Members can always donate funds, as Renesas and Intel have recently,
>>>>>>> and it is good to remember that each organization has a
>>>>>>> responsibility
>>>>>>> to donate human resources to the project, as mentioned in the
>>>>>>> membership agreement. Most member organizations have at least one
>>>>>>> person working full-time on YP issues.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One more note about membership. Please be aware that while the
>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>> currently places no concrete restrictions on membership level, there
>>>>>>> is an expectation that a member org's chosen level will correspond to
>>>>>>> some degree with organization size, but mostly with the real value it
>>>>>>> gets from the project. Members rely on YP as an upstream for their
>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>> software products, as an enabling tool for their hardware BSPs, or as
>>>>>>> a primary tool for creating operating systems for commercial embedded
>>>>>>> products. Given the extremely high market penetration the project has
>>>>>>> established in only five years, project dues are very inexpensive
>>>>>>> compared to the value received. These are vital business functions,
>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>> it makes sense to support the project as fully as your organization
>>>>>>> can.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _____________________________________________________
>>>>>>> Community
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Community management is a gap-filling role within the organization,
>>>>>>> with a charter to listen to each of the communities within the
>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>> - users, maintainers, technical leaders, maintainers - and to monitor
>>>>>>> and enable their efforts. Jeff "Jefro" Osier-Mixon is the community
>>>>>>> manager, and he also serves as business liaison to the technical
>>>>>>> writer, project liaison to Michael Halstead, and contributor to
>>>>>>> Advocacy and other efforts within the organization.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As we were short on time, Jefro briefly discussed the vibrant and
>>>>>>> very
>>>>>>> active YP community, which has experienced a rock-steady growth since
>>>>>>> the project's inception, having grown out of the already active
>>>>>>> OpenEmbedded community. The project has 35-50 distinct committers
>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>> month, and a very active codebase. (More technical stats at
>>>>>>> https://www.openhub.net/p/YoctoProject) The website experiences on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> order of 2.8M pageviews annually. The mailing lists are home to about
>>>>>>> 2500 very active developers, and we have active presence on several
>>>>>>> social media sites.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some statistics are available, and more metrics are being developed
>>>>>>> this year, but we discussed briefly that they are not entirely
>>>>>>> meaningful other than to establish and track trends. As project
>>>>>>> godfather Dave Stewart said once, it isn't the raw number of
>>>>>>> participants that matters, it's that we reach the right participants,
>>>>>>> those who benefit from the project and those who can do good for the
>>>>>>> project in return. With 80% market share and many thousands of
>>>>>>> individual users worldwide, I think we are currently successful with
>>>>>>> that, and it will continue to be our core value.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please feel free to contact me directly or comment on this thread to
>>>>>>> the Advisory Board, and don't hesitate to reach out to me personally
>>>>>>> if anything is unclear or if you have any questions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for participating!
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jeff Osier-Mixon
>>>>>>> Open Source Community Architect, Intel Corporation
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jeff Osier-Mixon
>>>>>> Open Source Community Architect, Intel Corporation
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> yocto-ab mailing list
>>>>>> yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>>>>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> yocto-ab mailing list
>>>>>> yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>>>>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yocto-ab mailing list
>>> yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Justin Waters
>> Director of Engineering
>> Timesys Corporation
>
>
>
--
_______________________________________________
yocto-ab mailing list
yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab