[yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: April meeting minutes & new member info
akuster
akuster at mvista.com
Fri Apr 22 16:03:04 PDT 2016
On 04/22/2016 01:22 PM, Cobbley, David A wrote:
> I agree that having members commit resources to advance the work is ideal. I believe the current rules do call for committed engineers and/or contributions.
correct
However, issue is appears to be that some members do not actually
follow that commitment, or they tend to count resources/contributions
for deliverables that mostly favor their own organization.
>
(looks around the room and sees everyone looking at me...)
> If we could tackle this issue - holding members accountable for their resource/contribution commitments - that would help our situation immensely.
This can get tricky. Increasing resources/contributions might be on the
same scale as increasing the dues for some Members.
- armin
>
> --David C
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Ricci, Davide
> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 1:02 PM
> To: William Mills <wmills at ti.com>; Jeff Osier-Mixon <jefro at jefro.net>; Justin Waters <justin.waters at timesys.com>
> Cc: yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [yocto-ab] YP Advisory Board: April meeting minutes & new member info
>
> 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
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto-ab mailing list
> yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab
>
More information about the yocto-ab
mailing list