[yocto-ab] Member involvement in the core of the project

[Erway, Tracey M]

Could we have a contribution status review at each AB meeting relative to core development ?

> On Sep 30, 2016, at 8:07 PM, akuster <akuster at mvista.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 09/30/2016 06:17 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>> One issue I've been giving some thought to is involvement of members
>> and their developers in the core engineering of the project. There are
>> several kinds of activity people undertake:
>> 
>> * Ownership of areas, reviewing and handling patches there
>> * Stable branch maintainership
>> * Bug fixing
>> * Recipe ownership and maintenance
>> * SWAT team (owns handling autobuilder monitoring/reporting)
> Not sure if these qualify:
> * QA
> * Doc's
> * Monthly tech meeting
> * New features
> * RFT ( request for testing) when we do major package version updates like python or gcc
> 
>> We've a lot of interesting process pieces which I'd really like to
>> expose to a wider audience as I think people don't realise the power of
>> some of the automated tooling or testing infrastructure we have.
> 
> Isn't this some of the value of the Yocto project? I am hoping we start promoting the Projects value a bit more.
> 
> - Armin
> 
>> One area that springs to mind is recipe maintainership. You can view
>> the automated reporting we have athttp://recipes.yoctoproject.org/rrs/
>> recipes/2.2/M4/ and this tells us who maintains a given OE-Core recipe,
>> what the current version is and what the current upstream release is
>> at.
>> 
>> I'm sure that the role of recipe maintainer is not as well documented
>> as perhaps it should be and this is something we can fix comparatively
>> easily. It boils down to being responsible for updating to new versions
>> when they become available and helping fix bugs in particular recipes
>> if any arise. It also carries a responsibility to improve testing, be
>> it by adding ptest to recipes if appropriate, or helping test recipes
>> through our other automated test means. I'd like to suggest that member
>> organisations each pick up responsibility for at least some handful of
>> recipes.
>> 
>> We have a comparatively large test matrix and a level of test
>> automation which I'm proud of. I'd love to see people learning about
>> our tools (recipe reporting, devtool, etc.) and our testing techniques
>> (ptest, oe-selftest, testimage, etc.) and then taking these into other
>> layers and places.
>> 
>> Members technically are required to provide a development resource who
>> works on the core of the project and we've traditionally not enforced
>> this. Something like recipe maintainership could be an easily tracked
>> and comparatively fair way of indicating involvement and support of the
>> project and also would then encourage the above transfer of technology
>> from the core layer into the wider ecosystem.
>> 
>> I was planning to raise this and discuss this further at the advisory
>> board meeting but this would seem like a good place/time to start a
>> discussion.
>> 
>> Thoughts/feedback/comments welcome.
>> 
>> I'm particularly open to other ideas on how we get members more
>> involved.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Richard
> 
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> yocto-ab mailing list
> yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab