Hi there. I've been going through the blueprints in preparation for next weeks TSC review. The top level topics are good, and I'd like to have the rest of the engineering blueprints checked over and updated to match what we talked about at the summit.
Ira, could you please create blueprints for the areas you plan to look into? Anything that will take longer than a month should have a blueprint. It's worth having a catch-all blueprint for anything left over. Please add these as a dependency to: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro/+spec/tr-toolchain-neon-performance
Zach, could you check: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-toolchain-misc/+spec/ltrace-support https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro/+spec/tr-toolchain-openocd
Peter, there's a whole range of QEMU ones that could do with a pass over.
For more about the review, see: https://wiki.linaro.org/Releases/1105/PublicPlanReview
For a list of all of the toolchain blueprints, see: http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/blueprints#toolchain
-- Michael
On 10 November 2010 07:27, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote:
Hi there. I've been going through the blueprints in preparation for next weeks TSC review. The top level topics are good, and I'd like to have the rest of the engineering blueprints checked over and updated to match what we talked about at the summit.
Peter, there's a whole range of QEMU ones that could do with a pass over.
I've had a look at these and fleshed them out mostly. There are some oddities: * why are maintain-beagle-models and qemu-continuous-integration under "tr-toolchain-consolidate-qemu" and not "tr-toolchain-integration" ? * should sound-support really be a "Medium" ? I thought we decided at UDS that it wasn't all that important
and I haven't worried too much about ones which are clearly far enough down the list that we're not going to get to them in this six month cycle.
-- PMM
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell peter.maydell@linaro.org wrote:
I've had a look at these and fleshed them out mostly. There are some oddities: * why are maintain-beagle-models and qemu-continuous-integration under "tr-toolchain-consolidate-qemu" and not "tr-toolchain-integration" ?
I think consolidation is an on-going process (hence the 'maintain' blueprint) and that CI will help the process.
* should sound-support really be a "Medium" ? I thought we decided at UDS that it wasn't all that important
It's medium compared to the other blueprints in it's group. Think of it as a scheduling thing - low priority but low effort (for the simple playback case at least) bumps it up to a medium.
and I haven't worried too much about ones which are clearly far enough down the list that we're not going to get to them in this six month cycle.
OK, can you mark them as such then so others know? Update the whiteboard with a note and add the line 'Tags: community' to the end of the whiteboard.
-- Michael
On 10 November 2010 21:14, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell peter.maydell@linaro.org wrote:
I've had a look at these and fleshed them out mostly. There are some oddities: * why are maintain-beagle-models and qemu-continuous-integration under "tr-toolchain-consolidate-qemu" and not "tr-toolchain-integration" ?
I think consolidation is an on-going process (hence the 'maintain' blueprint) and that CI will help the process.
Hmm. To me consolidation is all about pushing patches upstream (and we have a different blueprint for pushing omap patches upstream); I intended maintain-beagle-models to cover the stuff we wouldn't be doing if we didn't want to keep the qemu beagle model working as a platform for testing and demoing Linaro images. That's what I thought "integration" was for...
* should sound-support really be a "Medium" ? I thought we decided at UDS that it wasn't all that important
It's medium compared to the other blueprints in it's group.
You're using these as relative and not absolute priority levels? That's kind of confusing...
Think of it as a scheduling thing - low priority but low effort (for the simple playback case at least) bumps it up to a medium.
and I haven't worried too much about ones which are clearly far enough down the list that we're not going to get to them in this six month cycle.
OK, can you mark them as such then so others know? Update the whiteboard with a note and add the line 'Tags: community' to the end of the whiteboard.
OK. ...audio was in this group, by the way.
-- PMM
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Peter Maydell peter.maydell@linaro.org wrote:
On 10 November 2010 21:14, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell peter.maydell@linaro.org wrote:
I've had a look at these and fleshed them out mostly. There are some oddities: * why are maintain-beagle-models and qemu-continuous-integration under "tr-toolchain-consolidate-qemu" and not "tr-toolchain-integration" ?
I think consolidation is an on-going process (hence the 'maintain' blueprint) and that CI will help the process.
Hmm. To me consolidation is all about pushing patches upstream (and we have a different blueprint for pushing omap patches upstream); I intended maintain-beagle-models to cover the stuff we wouldn't be doing if we didn't want to keep the qemu beagle model working as a platform for testing and demoing Linaro images. That's what I thought "integration" was for...
* should sound-support really be a "Medium" ? I thought we decided at UDS that it wasn't all that important
It's medium compared to the other blueprints in it's group.
You're using these as relative and not absolute priority levels? That's kind of confusing...
It is. I don't have enough fidelity in the current system to show priority vs local priority vs schedule.
OK, can you mark them as such then so others know? Update the whiteboard with a note and add the line 'Tags: community' to the end of the whiteboard.
OK. ...audio was in this group, by the way.
Yip, you already have too much to do. I hope to do the planning today to see what we can actually achieve.
-- Michael
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org