00:24:51 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
00:28:31 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
01:19:50 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
01:23:34 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
01:47:32 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
01:51:11 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
02:41:51 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
02:46:16 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
03:12:46 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
03:16:27 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
04:22:16 * ** Ystk has joined #cip
04:50:45 * ** Ystk has quit IRC
06:21:15 * ** patersonc has joined #cip
06:25:15 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
06:31:13 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
07:11:52 * ** rajm has joined #cip
07:15:16 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
07:20:10 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
07:54:40 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
07:58:06 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
08:08:32 * ** toscalix has joined #cip
08:09:18 * rajm runs health checks on BBB and  renesas-iwg20m which work and results emailed to list
08:11:19 <toscalix> bwh: will you be able to attend to the cip-dev meeting?
08:38:57 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
08:42:31 <bwh> toscalix: yes I'm here
08:42:45 <toscalix> great
08:52:06 * ** kristerman has quit IRC
08:53:44 <toscalix> suddenly I have no access to cip-project mailman
08:54:55 * rajm agrees and wonders what's happened
08:55:41 <szlin> ditto
08:56:41 * ** vidda has joined #cip
08:59:45 <toscalix> notified to jeff from LF
09:00:16 <szlin> Let's start the meeting
09:00:21 <toscalix> szlin: would you conduct the meeting?
09:00:37 <szlin> sure
09:00:37 <toscalix> not sure I can stay the whole meeting
09:00:40 <toscalix> thanks
09:00:48 <szlin> #startmeeting
09:00:57 <szlin> #topic 1. roll call
09:01:05 <szlin> please say hi if you're here
09:01:08 <gavinlai> hi
09:01:09 <patersonc> hi
09:01:12 * rajm says hi
09:01:13 <toscalix> hi o/
09:01:14 * ** kristerman has joined #cip
09:01:25 <bwh> hi
09:01:50 <szlin> #topic 2. CIP kernel maintenance team working model
09:02:02 * ** vidda has joined #cip
09:02:25 <szlin> Ben had replied the mail yeserday in cip-dev
09:02:43 <szlin> he addressed that " this would depend on how many developers would be working on it (from all CIP members) and how much time they can devote."
09:03:11 <weshuang> hi
09:03:13 <toscalix> should we use an existing mailing list, a new one or mail directly bwh for pre-reviewing the patches ?
09:03:18 <vidda> hi
09:04:39 <bwh> I don't expect the volume to be that high, so either cip-dev or directly to me (or other developer experienced with doing public reviews)
09:05:04 <toscalix> I would go for cip-dev with a specific tag on the subject so we can filter
09:05:09 <toscalix> or similar
09:05:42 <patersonc> For the CIP Kernel maintenance itself, as it looks like there will be multiple maintainers is there any value in using something like patchwork?
09:07:25 <toscalix> better same process/tool than the kernel: mail This is about learning how the kernel does it, isn't it?
09:07:55 <bwh> There could be; I haven't tried using it yet. But for the time being we're mostly going to be reviewing changes in 4.4-stable
09:08:10 <bwh> toscalix: Some kernel subsystems use patchwork
09:08:11 <toscalix> for cip core, I would use what debian use it for the same reason. But this is out of scope
09:08:27 <toscalix> bwh: LTS?
09:08:46 <bwh> What about it?
09:09:00 <patersonc> renesas-soc uses patchwork: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-renesas-soc/list/
09:09:16 <patersonc> Patchwork would only be useful for cip, not for LTS review
09:09:27 <szlin> toscalix: Do you mean patchwork for LTS?
09:09:33 * toscalix is bias. Not a big fan of patchwork but I would agree on whatever kernel guys do
09:10:44 <toscalix> LTS does not use it, right? So I would not use it for this. CIP core, I would consider it
09:10:49 * ** HarryYJ_Jhou has joined #cip
09:11:23 <bwh> toscalix: Right, stable/longterm branches are managed with a patch queue and mailed out for review
09:11:42 <toscalix> so that is what needs to be learned/promoted, I think
09:12:30 <toscalix> I would like to see a way to use mail + gitlab but that is out of the scope for now. Maybe for CIP core...
09:13:12 <toscalix> #idea evaluate patchwork for cip-core or mail+gitlab
09:13:33 <toscalix> #idea evaluate patchwork for cip-kernel#
09:14:13 <szlin> back to kernel maintenance, how do we co-work with each others to avoid re-work in the same patch
09:14:17 <toscalix> #agreed use cip-dev for interinm 4.4-stable patch review
09:14:54 <szlin> it's FIFO policy in upstream kernel.
09:15:14 <bwh> szlin: I'm not sure we should initially. Multiple reviews of the same patch may catch more problems!
09:15:40 <szlin> fair enough
09:15:51 <toscalix> szlin: I do not think concurrency is an issue in stable :-)
09:16:35 <bwh> With more experienced reviewers I can see this being more useful. Then I suppose we would divide up each stable series between the available reviewers in CIP.
09:18:21 * patersonc agrees
09:19:09 <toscalix> szlin: are you fine with that?
09:19:38 * szlin agree with that
09:20:35 <toscalix> are we done with this topic?
09:20:57 <szlin> so ben, do you mean that you{or others} will send out the patches which are under review to cip-dev
09:21:03 <patersonc> So was the plan to forward the stable reviews to cip-dev?
09:21:25 <szlin> patersonc: the same question :D
09:21:34 <patersonc> :)
09:22:20 <bwh> I was thinking that reviewers would subscribe to stable, and then if they weren't sure about sending a review then they would send that to cip-dev first
09:23:00 <bwh> But for a start I can forward the latest 4.4-stable patch series (4.4.128) to cip-dev since reviewers presumably aren't all subscribed to stable already
09:23:21 <bwh> You can then either reply to cip-dev or reply-all
09:24:00 <bwh> How does that sound?
09:24:27 <szlin> I think it worth to try
09:25:21 <toscalix> any potential reviewer around who disagrees?
09:25:42 <szlin> so that the members reply the result of patches review afterwards
09:25:43 <toscalix> 3
09:25:45 <toscalix> 2
09:26:02 <toscalix> 1
09:26:35 <toscalix> #agreed interim 4.4-stable patch review process
09:26:49 <toscalix> questions about details please send them to cip-dev
09:27:02 <toscalix> is it worth it to write down somewhere on the wiki this agreement?
09:27:08 <patersonc> bwh: Presumably this reviewing should just be on "4.x.xx-stable review" threads?
09:27:09 * szlin agree
09:27:25 <patersonc> toscalix: Sorry, too late!
09:27:30 <toscalix> np
09:27:39 <toscalix> we have 3 min left
09:27:40 <toscalix> go ahead
09:28:03 <bwh> patersonc: right
09:28:26 <toscalix> AOB?
09:28:44 <toscalix> Any Other Business?
09:28:51 <szlin> bwh: one more question, can you add information like due date for patch reivew?
09:29:04 <bwh> szlin: OK
09:29:10 <szlin> thanks
09:29:51 <szlin> any questions?
09:29:58 <toscalix> o/
09:30:10 <szlin> please
09:30:14 <toscalix> patersonc: do you have any additional question related with Debian LTS ?
09:30:40 <patersonc> toscalix: I think I'm done for now. Thanks
09:31:11 <toscalix> Reminder: today I will move the cip-kernel mirror
09:31:25 <szlin> if there is no question, I will end the meeting.
09:31:32 <toscalix> it might not be fast given that gitlab.com is a freemium service and the kernel is a big repo
09:31:44 <toscalix> _o_
09:31:51 <toscalix> done
09:32:04 <szlin> #endmeeting