Re: [yocto] Request for Quotations for development work

Re: [yocto] Request for Quotations for development work

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 15:09 +0100, Richard Purdie via
lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
> The project has some exciting plans in progress and I'm happy to say
> we're now in the fortunate position that we're able to seek quotations
> for some development work. For more details please see this page on
> website:
> 
> https://www.yoctoproject.org/community/yocto-project-engineering-request-for-quotation/
> 
> Please feel free to reach out to me or the Yocto Project TSC if there
> are any questions.

We've added an update to the end of the above link with a deadline for
quotations and some other answers to commonly asked questions.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [yocto] Request for Quotations for development work

[Tom Isaacson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3262 bytes --]

I read this and the linked articles and one piece in
https://www.linux.com/audience/maintainer-confidential-opportunities-and-challenges-of-the-ubiquitous-but-under-resourced-yocto-project/
caught my eye:

> One question that comes up a lot is the project’s development model. We’re
> an “old school” patch on a mailing list, similar to the kernel. New
> developers complain that we should have GitHub workflows so they can make
> point-and-click patch submissions. I have made submissions to other
> projects that way, and I can see the attraction of it. Equally, it does
> depend a lot on your review requirements. We want many people to see our
> patches, not just one person, and we greatly benefit from that
> comprehensive peer review.


I'm an old school engineer but I've never used the "patch to mailing list"
model so I find it quite difficult. It seemed like someone must have solved
this problem already so I've been looking around and found
https://gitgitgadget.github.io/ This is what the git mailing list use - you
create a PR in Github and it sends the patch to the mailing list. You then
respond to comments and update the PR. Finally someone merges your patch.
It seems like this could be implemented alongside the existing Patchwork
solution relatively easily and provide an alternate route to those of us
who prefer the modern tooling.

For a complete solution you could add the same functionality to Patchwork
(I assume you use https://github.com/getpatchwork/patchwork) to make it
bi-directional - patches from the mailing list are created as PRs in
Github, and PRs in Github have their patches emailed to the mailing list.
This then solves your Patchtest problem - the tests could instead be
implemented as CI builds in Github Actions (which is more maintainable) and
the results fed back to the mailing list. Alternatives to Github are of
course available.

Is the Patchtest source code available anywhere?




On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 2:49 AM Richard Purdie <
richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 15:09 +0100, Richard Purdie via
> lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
> > The project has some exciting plans in progress and I'm happy to say
> > we're now in the fortunate position that we're able to seek quotations
> > for some development work. For more details please see this page on
> > website:
> >
> >
> https://www.yoctoproject.org/community/yocto-project-engineering-request-for-quotation/
> >
> > Please feel free to reach out to me or the Yocto Project TSC if there
> > are any questions.
>
> We've added an update to the end of the above link with a deadline for
> quotations and some other answers to commonly asked questions.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
> View/Reply Online (#60554):
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/60554
> Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/99644713/7359542
> Group Owner: yocto+owner@lists.yoctoproject.org
> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/leave/11894869/7359542/1977914009/xyzzy
> [tom.isaacson@teknique.com]
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>

-- 
Tom Isaacson

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4944 bytes --]

Re: [yocto] Request for Quotations for development work

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2023-07-18 at 09:00 +1200, Tom Isaacson wrote:
> I read this and the linked articles and one piece in
> https://www.linux.com/audience/maintainer-confidential-opportunities-and-challenges-of-the-ubiquitous-but-under-resourced-yocto-project/
>   caught my eye:
> > One question that comes up a lot is the project’s development
> > model. We’re an “old school” patch on a mailing list, similar to
> > the kernel. New developers complain that we should have GitHub
> > workflows so they can make point-and-click patch submissions. I
> > have made submissions to other projects that way, and I can see the
> > attraction of it. Equally, it does depend a lot on your review
> > requirements. We want many people to see our patches, not just one
> > person, and we greatly benefit from that comprehensive peer review.
> 
> I'm an old school engineer but I've never used the "patch to mailing
> list" model so I find it quite difficult. It seemed like someone must
> have solved this problem already so I've been looking around and
> found https://gitgitgadget.github.io/ This is what the git mailing
> list use - you create a PR in Github and it sends the patch to the
> mailing list. You then respond to comments and update the PR. Finally
> someone merges your patch.
> It seems like this could be implemented alongside the existing
> Patchwork solution relatively easily and provide an alternate route
> to those of us who prefer the modern tooling.
> 
> For a complete solution you could add the same functionality to
> Patchwork (I assume you
> use https://github.com/getpatchwork/patchwork) to make it bi-
> directional - patches from the mailing list are created as PRs in
> Github, and PRs in Github have their patches emailed to the mailing
> list. This then solves your Patchtest problem - the tests could
> instead be implemented as CI builds in Github Actions (which is more
> maintainable) and the results fed back to the mailing list.
> Alternatives to Github are of course available.

I think it probably could be done, I've wondered about this myself. The
challenge is that even getting patchwork working reliably and then
having patchtest on top of that back and operational has been a
challenge. The next step is to get our testing back and see if we can
keep that going this time. We still don't have great automation about
updating patchwork patch status for example either.

If patchtest is successful, there are things we may be able to build on
top of that. I suspect the challenge will be "permissions" both on the
mailing list side and on the github/whatever side and whether it can
show/link the "real" users or not.

> Is the Patchtest source code available anywhere?

https://git.yoctoproject.org/patchtest/
https://git.yoctoproject.org/patchtest-oe/

Cheers,

Richard