openbmc project for telemetry

openbmc project for telemetry

[Adrian Ambrożewicz]

Hello Brad,

First I would like to say introduce myself as it's my first message to 
the mailing list. I'm Adrian, engineer from Intel Technology Poland. I'm 
very excited to have an opportunity to work within this group of 
professionals :)

Currently we're working with Piotr on Redfish Telemetry. Current design 
in the review 
(https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/24357) seems to be 
on track to be accepted.

I would like to ask you what requirements we have to comply to have our 
own repository in openbmc project. From what I've seen in other topic - 
Apache 2.0 is preferred license. Are there any other expectations?

Should we wait until mentioned design is accepted or can we start 
working on some initial implementation right away? If so - I would love 
to have repo up and running as soon as possible.

Regards,
Adrian

Re: openbmc project for telemetry

[Brad Bishop]

> On Oct 31, 2019, at 6:14 AM, Adrian Ambrożewicz <adrian.ambrozewicz@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Brad,
> 
> First I would like to say introduce myself as it's my first message to the mailing list. I'm Adrian, engineer from Intel Technology Poland. I'm very excited to have an opportunity to work within this group of professionals :)

Welcome, and likewise!

> Currently we're working with Piotr on Redfish Telemetry. Current design in the review (https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/24357) seems to be on track to be accepted.
> 
> I would like to ask you what requirements we have to comply to have our own repository in openbmc project. From what I've seen in other topic - Apache 2.0 is preferred license. Are there any other expectations?

I can’t think of any other than the license as you’ve mentioned.

> Should we wait until mentioned design is accepted or can we start working on some initial implementation right away? If so - I would love to have repo up and running as soon as possible.

I don’t see any need to wait.  What would you like this repository called?

thx - brad

Re: openbmc project for telemetry

[Adrian Ambrożewicz]

W dniu 10/31/2019 o 12:48, Brad Bishop pisze:
> 
>> On Oct 31, 2019, at 6:14 AM, Adrian Ambrożewicz <adrian.ambrozewicz@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Brad,
>>
>> First I would like to say introduce myself as it's my first message to the mailing list. I'm Adrian, engineer from Intel Technology Poland. I'm very excited to have an opportunity to work within this group of professionals :)
> 
> Welcome, and likewise!
> 
>> Currently we're working with Piotr on Redfish Telemetry. Current design in the review (https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/24357) seems to be on track to be accepted.
>>
>> I would like to ask you what requirements we have to comply to have our own repository in openbmc project. From what I've seen in other topic - Apache 2.0 is preferred license. Are there any other expectations?
> 
> I can’t think of any other than the license as you’ve mentioned.
> 
>> Should we wait until mentioned design is accepted or can we start working on some initial implementation right away? If so - I would love to have repo up and running as soon as possible.
> 
> I don’t see any need to wait.  What would you like this repository called?
> 
> thx - brad
> 

Cool! After speaking with Piotr we agreed on straightforward approach. 
The repo should be named 'telemetry' :)

Regards,
Adrian

Re: openbmc project for telemetry

[Adrian Ambrożewicz]

Are there any obstacles? I'm eager to hear the good news :)

Regards,
Adrian

W dniu 11/4/2019 o 14:47, Adrian Ambrożewicz pisze:
> 
> 
> W dniu 10/31/2019 o 12:48, Brad Bishop pisze:
>>
>>> On Oct 31, 2019, at 6:14 AM, Adrian Ambrożewicz 
>>> <adrian.ambrozewicz@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Brad,
>>>
>>> First I would like to say introduce myself as it's my first message 
>>> to the mailing list. I'm Adrian, engineer from Intel Technology 
>>> Poland. I'm very excited to have an opportunity to work within this 
>>> group of professionals :)
>>
>> Welcome, and likewise!
>>
>>> Currently we're working with Piotr on Redfish Telemetry. Current 
>>> design in the review 
>>> (https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/24357) seems to 
>>> be on track to be accepted.
>>>
>>> I would like to ask you what requirements we have to comply to have 
>>> our own repository in openbmc project. From what I've seen in other 
>>> topic - Apache 2.0 is preferred license. Are there any other 
>>> expectations?
>>
>> I can’t think of any other than the license as you’ve mentioned.
>>
>>> Should we wait until mentioned design is accepted or can we start 
>>> working on some initial implementation right away? If so - I would 
>>> love to have repo up and running as soon as possible.
>>
>> I don’t see any need to wait.  What would you like this repository 
>> called?
>>
>> thx - brad
>>
> 
> Cool! After speaking with Piotr we agreed on straightforward approach. 
> The repo should be named 'telemetry' :)
> 
> Regards,
> Adrian
> 

Re: openbmc project for telemetry

[Brad Bishop]

> On Nov 13, 2019, at 11:32 AM, Adrian Ambrożewicz <adrian.ambrozewicz@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> Are there any obstacles? I'm eager to hear the good news :)

No obstacles; openbmc/telemetry created.

thx -brad

Re: openbmc project for telemetry

[Adrian Ambrożewicz]

W dniu 11/13/2019 o 20:36, Brad Bishop pisze:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 13, 2019, at 11:32 AM, Adrian Ambrożewicz <adrian.ambrozewicz@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Are there any obstacles? I'm eager to hear the good news :)
> 
> No obstacles; openbmc/telemetry created.
> 
> thx -brad
> 

Thanks a lot!

So now it's time for silly questions...

What should be my first steps as maintainer? I've found guide here 
https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/maintainer-workflow.md but 
its general.
I'm more interested in technical side of things.
- Is Linux MAINTAINERS format utilized for automation or information 
about code maintainers should be just included in README file in repo? 
MAINTAINERS file is referenced in 
https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/maintainer-workflow.md but I 
don't see that in every repo..
- Should maintainer have additional access for repo/gerrit config?

Regards,
Adrian

Re: openbmc project for telemetry

[Brad Bishop]

> On Nov 14, 2019, at 5:55 AM, Adrian Ambrożewicz <adrian.ambrozewicz@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> So now it's time for silly questions...
> 
> What should be my first steps as maintainer?

I would add MAINTAINERS, LICENSE and README files.  Add a clang-format file to avoid quibbling over style.  Select a build system.  Many OpenBMC projects are moving to meson.  Ask Andrew to enable the repository CI job on the telemetry repo.  Start submitting patches for review.

And if you are willing, document the process as you go though it and add that to the maintainer workflow document for the next person :-)

> I've found guide here https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/maintainer-workflow.md but its general.
> I'm more interested in technical side of things.
> - Is Linux MAINTAINERS format utilized for automation or information about code maintainers should be just included in README file in repo? MAINTAINERS file is referenced in https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/maintainer-workflow.md but I don't see that in every repo..

Most OpenBMC projects are using this format:

https://github.com/openbmc/hiomapd/blob/master/MAINTAINERS

I’m not aware of any automation that has been built around that file format though.  FWIW I intend to implement the owners plugin on our gerrit installation in the near future:

https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/owners/

so you could make use of that if you wanted.

> - Should maintainer have additional access for repo/gerrit config?

You have owner acesss (full access) on the project.  You can delegate or give that to others here: https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/admin/groups/45,members

-brad

Re: openbmc project for telemetry

[Adrian Ambrożewicz]

W dniu 11/14/2019 o 14:57, Brad Bishop pisze:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 14, 2019, at 5:55 AM, Adrian Ambrożewicz <adrian.ambrozewicz@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> So now it's time for silly questions...
>>
>> What should be my first steps as maintainer?
> 
> I would add MAINTAINERS, LICENSE and README files.  Add a clang-format file to avoid quibbling over style.  Select a build system.  Many OpenBMC projects are moving to meson.  Ask Andrew to enable the repository CI job on the telemetry repo.  Start submitting patches for review.
> 
> And if you are willing, document the process as you go though it and add that to the maintainer workflow document for the next person :-)
> 
>> I've found guide here https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/maintainer-workflow.md but its general.
>> I'm more interested in technical side of things.
>> - Is Linux MAINTAINERS format utilized for automation or information about code maintainers should be just included in README file in repo? MAINTAINERS file is referenced in https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/maintainer-workflow.md but I don't see that in every repo..
> 
> Most OpenBMC projects are using this format:
> 
> https://github.com/openbmc/hiomapd/blob/master/MAINTAINERS
> 
> I’m not aware of any automation that has been built around that file format though.  FWIW I intend to implement the owners plugin on our gerrit installation in the near future:
> 
> https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/owners/
> 
> so you could make use of that if you wanted.
> 
>> - Should maintainer have additional access for repo/gerrit config?
> 
> You have owner acesss (full access) on the project.  You can delegate or give that to others here: https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/admin/groups/45,members
> 
> -brad
> 

Thanks a lot for clear explanation. Work on that will commence as soon 
as Telemetry Service implementation will start.

Regards,
Adrian

Re: openbmc project for telemetry

[Alexander Tereschenko]

> Most OpenBMC projects are using this format:
>
> https://github.com/openbmc/hiomapd/blob/master/MAINTAINERS
>
> I’m not aware of any automation that has been built around that file 
> format though.  FWIW I intend to implement the owners plugin on our 
> gerrit installation in the near future:
>
> https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/owners/
>
> so you could make use of that if you wanted. 


FWIW, Github has recently added new feature with CODEOWNERS file, could 
be useful probably: 
https://help.github.com/en/github/creating-cloning-and-archiving-repositories/about-code-owners