> -----Original Message----- > From: Trevor Woerner [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 9:36 AM > To: Angolini Daiane-B19406; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] maintainer for imx53qsb > > Hi, > > Are there any published maintainer procedures/responsibilities?
I´m happy you have questioned that! > > I realize it might be best to not be too stringent on these requirements, > but on the other hand it seems as though maintainers are free to define > whatever they feel is enough, which might be "nothing" ;-) > > More seriously, a maintainer could decide booting core-image-minimal and > seeing a login prompt is enough. This would be setting the bar quite low. The maintainer is the person that will have the Minerva/casting vote when we face a deadlock. S/he is responsible to keep the things working. For those boards in meta-fsl-arm-extra, it´s much more easy to understand, because maintainer is the one who keeps kernel updated, u-boot tested/working. For meta-fsl-arm boards it´s lightly different, as 'who' keeps kernel updated is Freescale. It´s not a matter of "what is supported", because anyone can add support for anything. But a matter of keeping the gears spinning. > > Maybe for each board a matrix could be maintained whereby the maintainer is > free to do as few or as many things from the list of potential items? > At the very least, we'd have a better definition of what "maintained" > would mean for each board. Even better: if instructions were available > describing how to build and test each line item, then everyone could > benefit! In addition, we want maintainers help for some "maintainer work" we face in our day-by-day, as example: Keep release notes updated Keep test cycle updated Keep the most usual images building and booting You can see here [1] the goals we had in last release (1.6). It´s supposed that *at least* the maintainer have tested all those items for her/him board. When a build error is faced, the maintainer will "fix" it. For those guys with kernel control (meta-fsl-arm-extra) is expected that they properly fix the kernel issue (when it´s a kernel issue). But anything out of our control should be work-rounded anyway. [1] http://freescale.github.io/doc/release-notes/1.5/index.html#goals Otavio, did I miss anything? Daiane > > Best regards, > Trevor > -- _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
