From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BE1DC433B4 for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 01:38:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B229A61264 for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 01:38:09 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B229A61264 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=aj.id.au Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FYQbN2dpfz301L for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 11:38:08 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=aj.id.au header.i=@aj.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=plrAUeOw; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=od78Yzun; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=aj.id.au (client-ip=66.111.4.28; helo=out4-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=andrew@aj.id.au; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=aj.id.au header.i=@aj.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=plrAUeOw; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=od78Yzun; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FYQZm2ddlz2xgJ for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 11:37:35 +1000 (AEST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A3E5C00C1; Sun, 2 May 2021 21:37:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 02 May 2021 21:37:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aj.id.au; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to:cc :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm2; bh=mZpVJ FIf+WqaT/1O5h4TcRUOZ6dgoCpd8lt29IWl23U=; b=plrAUeOwcrQBr3cR/XuMb TxXHUJBeFPWSK9hsNfOqg+lls61MjRB/FulI/qjGYwz869R0AIUUNvQYqYBKRls2 GbIMq0+6vo+xTwjsjoVIg09hEJ408RO3jA/AH/wMZp0GxpIA2FlvQJxZLHPhkUxg lu1sT9Nnq6YyOq4xbVHJ1eZsX4JhlqzQ6dl+2rN2eGmGcX5lP8DC/NWxCNjKo6nA qLiYP1lF2WnEHON8lFXGePwWS3UA9pgY76wiLyCU/zZ9hdyEZ+tEc+W+qDLC9QAN 4TJGEvgBXd+8Iu28lJM9Xu4XaQDehnCaBVIx911nZ75nBFr2cC6y0r/uYVrdJUaB w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=mZpVJFIf+WqaT/1O5h4TcRUOZ6dgoCpd8lt29IWl2 3U=; b=od78YzunpZ1yS9z5McSbIGw5yP/R+SCH3Nb/k8wkjmq75WqXVZjV8c2R1 Q+CTY3IFdXG4dScWQ3YYKHa14Be5VdezdJOu/6UR3yUl9rUH6tmgyxuyILqzXrvt yTTY3UUGjYux1CjO96yOA0otOS/S/ApYmKq7Iln4S/XbSHe/BxiTj/wS2NdBUrNL t0bRuRo88DhvEstA9h1Zckg+TRJsv02pUAWNEVew42HxiK8EPx8AXFoB/cWx+lmj bgnTT8AzQTggq+Hc0iR5TCN8OwhpxB1T8Y5GlbefW9UD/JQm/wwWN2c0x5aIkMTx GwQqEM3Pbyux0nXzgAr/c2K3pr2bQ== X-ME-Sender:

X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvdefvddguddvtdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtgfesthhqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdet nhgurhgvficulfgvfhhfvghrhidfuceorghnughrvgifsegrjhdrihgurdgruheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhephffgkefhudeghfejudfhtdfguedtfeehjeevteffgeduudetjeei jefhheffgfefnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrnhgurhgvfiesrghjrdhiugdr rghu X-ME-Proxy:

Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id A8356A00079; Sun, 2 May 2021 21:37:30 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-403-gbc3c488b23-fm-20210419.005-gbc3c488b Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References:

<2b7c9c78-37c5-5964-5f4c-d07fadf3590a@linux.ibm.com> <4b25d1d9-b4c7-1a58-f0a0-b9fd9cd73fe8@linux.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 03 May 2021 11:07:08 +0930 From: "Andrew Jeffery" To: "Joseph Reynolds" , "Patrick Williams" Subject: Re: Request new repo for IBM-specific code: ibm-acf Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: openbmc , Brad Bishop Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On Mon, 3 May 2021, at 09:16, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Sat, 1 May 2021, at 15:00, Joseph Reynolds wrote: > > On 4/30/21 8:29 AM, Patrick Williams wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 04:09:58PM -0500, Joseph Reynolds wrote: > > > =20 > > >> So ... does the GitHub OpenBMC organization host vendor specific = repos > > >> (perhaps github.com/openbmc/ibm-misc), or does the source code go= > > >> somewhere else (such as IBM's public fork in > > >> github.com/ibm-openbmc/pam-ibm-acf)? > > > I'm strongly opposed to dumping-ground repositories like > > > "-misc". We approved exactly one of those and the ration= ale we > > > were given was they had a bunch of existing code they were going t= o work > > > at getting upstreamed, but wanted a place to be able to interact w= ith > > > their vendors in the interrim. We should not be having *new* code= going > > > into that or any other "misc" repository. > > > > > > We have generally not wanted OpenBMC-oriented code in non-openbmc-= org > > > repositories that are then picked up by openbmc/openbmc recipes. = If you > > > have a generally applicable library that isn't tied to openbmc in = any > > > way, or especially one that already has good usage outside of open= bmc, > > > then another github org seems reasonable. That isn't what you hav= e > > > here. > > > > > > It sounds like you have a good definition here of what you want to= do, > > > so I'm fine with `openbmc/pam-ibm-acf`. I don't see any reason we= > > > cannot host `openbmc/-` repositories for things = which > > > are company specific, as long as those repositories are only picke= d up > > > by your meta- layer. > >=20 > > Patrick, > >=20 > > Thanks.=C2=A0 That works for me.=C2=A0 I propose a new repo ibm-acf = which will=20 > > have 4 related parts: > > 1. The Linux-PAM pam_ibmacf module (targeted to run on the BMC) > > 2. A tool to create and read ACF files (targeted to run on the build= host) > > 3. Common source library for use by the two items above and by the B= MC's=20 > > function to upload & validate an ACF file. > > 4. Absolutely minimal test cases and documentation. >=20 > What? Why? I don't have much context, but I think this needs more just= ification. To clarify, "absolutely minimal test cases and documentation" is what I=20= what I think needs more justification. Andrew