Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback

[Andres Gomez]

Hi,

Just chipping in to leave a couple of additional notes.

As other have said before me, I also think the organization was very
good.

Things mentioned before:

 * Tables layout: kind of agree it was not great for following the
   talks but they were also making it easier to talk with other
   attendees. I have mixed feelings.
 * I agree more power strips would have been welcome.
 * The microphones were having some small problems but it was not too
   bad.

Positive things also mentioned:

 * WiFi worked great.
 * 1 single big room and more time for hallway conversations was good.
 * Food, beverage, snacks, etc. were very good.
 * Google's facilities and staff were great: organization, catering and
   security people. I hope they pass this feedback to them ☺

Additionally:

 * In the "not so good" part; the details (timetable) of the Program
   were published very late (no more than 1 week before the
   conference). I would have liked to know way in advance at what hour
   in the morning the conference was starting. The same with regards to
   the "Social events". I only got to know that there was a "Pre-
   conference social event" the previous evening to the start of the
   conference after that had already happened, for example.

Finally, I took the freedom to complete the Program page with the
missing video links:

https://www.x.org/wiki/Events/XDC2017/Program/


I hope my comments are helpful.

Thanks again for a great conference.

Br.


On Wed, 2017-09-27 at 10:32 -0700, Miguel Angel Vico wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In general, I think the organization was great. I agree having
> everything happen in a single room was a good point. Here's some of my
> personal feedback:
> 
>  * I didn't like the tables layout at all. I found it to be extremely
>uncomfortable to have to look sideways in order to see the screens
>and presenter.
> 
>  * There were a very few power strips, and not well distributed along
>the tables.
> 
> 
> Also, this is what I've been able to gather from some of my colleagues
> here at NVIDIA::
> 
>  * Some people watching the conference remotely complained about the
>stream quality, and the recordings wouldn't include the presenter.
> 
>In one of the hallway conversations, Martin mentioned in XDC2016
>they had a team of camera experts doing the job, and will try to
>improve that part in future XDC's.
> 
>  * The microphone/audio situation wasn't great either.  I don't know
>how practical it is with something the size of XDC, but at Khronos
>meetings, they usually set up microphones for the audience too, with
>tap-on/tap-off switches, and a ratio of 1:2 or 1:3 for
>microphones:people.  That makes Q a lot easier.  Alternatively,
>having a question queue rather than running mics around the room can
>speed things up, but makes cross-talk harder.
> 
>  * The table/chair layout was really cumbersome. Beyond just the
>orientation, some people had a lot of trouble getting in/out to use
>the restroom, grab snacks, etc.
> 
> 
> On a positive note:
> 
>  * More time for hallway conversations was in general a good thing.
>Some of us got a ton of useful feedback talking to others.
> 
>  * The food was great, and having food on-site gave us even more time
>for hallway-tracking.
> 
>  * Surprisingly, parking was not an issue.
> 
>  * Signage was good, and the security guards were polite/helpful. It
>was easy to find the room and get our badges.
> 
>  * The wifi worked great in general, which is a rarity at conferences.
>It was pretty spotty at XDC 2016.
> 
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:49:10 -0700
> Manasi Navare wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > XDC was a really great conference and loved the fact that it was
> > in just one room which kept all the hallway conversations in that room 
> > resulting
> > into more networking.
> > But I agree with Andres that for the videos, it would be great to split the
> > huge youtube video stream per presentation and have seperate links for each
> > talk somewhere on the XDC page.
> > 
> > Regards
> > Manasi
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 01:25:15PM -0400, Andres Rodriguez wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > A small piece of feedback from those of us watching remotely. It would be
> > > nice to have a simple to access index for the long livestream videos.
> > > 
> > > I think the XDC 2017 wiki page would be a good place for this 
> > > information. A
> > > brief example:
> > > 
> > > Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Link with timestamp
> > > ---||-
> > > ...| ...| youtu.be/video-id?t=XhYmZs
> > > 
> > > Or alternatively, a list of hyperlinks with the presentation title as text
> > > that point to the correct timestamp in the video would also be sufficient.
> > > 
> > > Really enjoyed the talks, and would like them to be slightly easier to
> > > access and share with others.

[PATCH util-modular v3] release.sh: unconditionally unset GPGKEY

[Andres Gomez]

GPGKEY may already exist in the environment. Unconditionally unset it
to avoid any problem.

v2: unsetting is safer than redefining to quietly use a potentially
wrong key stored in the variable (Peter).
v3: Simplify by unconditionally unsetting GPGKEY (Peter).

Signed-off-by: Andres Gomez <ago...@igalia.com>
Cc: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com>
Cc: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutte...@who-t.net>
---
 release.sh | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/release.sh b/release.sh
index f976f94..ff89d2e 100755
--- a/release.sh
+++ b/release.sh
@@ -808,6 +808,9 @@ if [ "x$GPG" = "x" ] ; then
 fi
 fi
 
+# Avoid problems if GPGKEY is already set in the environment
+unset GPGKEY
+
 # Set the default make tarball creation command
 MAKE_DIST_CMD=distcheck
 
-- 
2.11.0

___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Re: [PATCH util-modular v2] release.sh: unset GPGKEY if already existing

[Andres Gomez]

On Thu, 2017-04-20 at 08:18 +0300, Andres Gomez wrote:
...
> 
I suppose this other version would work too but, then, we will have a
> different outcome if GPGKEY is set with or without an empty string. In
> that case I would go for an even simpler initialization:
> 
> GPGKEY="" 

Or, simply:

unset GPGKEY

-- 
Br,

Andres
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Re: [PATCH util-modular v2] release.sh: unset GPGKEY if already existing

[Andres Gomez]

On Thu, 2017-04-20 at 10:17 +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 03:59:33PM +0300, Andres Gomez wrote:
> > GPGKEY may already exist in the environment. In that case, just
> > unset it.
> > 
> > v2: unsetting is safer than redefining to quietly use a potentially
> > wrong key stored in the variable (Peter).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andres Gomez <ago...@igalia.com>
> > Cc: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com>
> > Cc: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutte...@who-t.net>
> > ---
> >  release.sh | 5 +
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/release.sh b/release.sh
> > index f976f94..b8a0aaf 100755
> > --- a/release.sh
> > +++ b/release.sh
> > @@ -808,6 +808,11 @@ if [ "x$GPG" = "x" ] ; then
> >  fi
> >  fi
> >  
> > +# Unset GPGKEY if needed
> > +if [ ! -z ${GPGKEY+x} ] ; then
> > +unset GPGKEY
> > +fi
> 
> wouldn't that fail if GPGKEY is set to the empty string? Plus, I had to look
> up what ${foo+x} actually does :) Should we just stick to the simple well
> known:
> 
> if [ "x$GPGKEY" != "x" ] ; then
> unset GPGKEY
> fi

${foo+x} actually ensures it. That solution always unsets if the
variable is set, empty string or not.

I suppose this other version would work too but, then, we will have a
different outcome if GPGKEY is set with or without an empty string. In
that case I would go for an even simpler initialization:

GPGKEY="" 

That way you ensure that GPGKEY is always set to an empty string.

Let me know what you prefer.

-- 
Br,

Andres
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

[PATCH util-modular v2] release.sh: unset GPGKEY if already existing

[Andres Gomez]

GPGKEY may already exist in the environment. In that case, just
unset it.

v2: unsetting is safer than redefining to quietly use a potentially
wrong key stored in the variable (Peter).

Signed-off-by: Andres Gomez <ago...@igalia.com>
Cc: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com>
Cc: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutte...@who-t.net>
---
 release.sh | 5 +
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/release.sh b/release.sh
index f976f94..b8a0aaf 100755
--- a/release.sh
+++ b/release.sh
@@ -808,6 +808,11 @@ if [ "x$GPG" = "x" ] ; then
 fi
 fi
 
+# Unset GPGKEY if needed
+if [ ! -z ${GPGKEY+x} ] ; then
+unset GPGKEY
+fi
+
 # Set the default make tarball creation command
 MAKE_DIST_CMD=distcheck
 
-- 
2.11.0

___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Re: [PATCH util-modular] release.sh: redefine GPGKEY if already existing

[Andres Gomez]

On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 12:08 +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 04:26:35PM +0300, Andres Gomez wrote:
> > GPGKEY may already exist in the environment. In that case, just
> > redefine it adding "-u"
> 
> Is GPGKEY a common thing used in other scripts? I honestly don't know. If
> not, then I wonder if redefining it is risky to pick the wrong key and it
> may be better to just zero it out, requiring the use of --gpgkey for th
> release script.

GPGKEY is mentioned in several receipts and scripts such as:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/GnuPrivacyGuardHowto#Setting_the_key_to_be_the_default
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianRepository/SetupWithMinidinstall

But it is true that it is not used in other scripts in util-modular and
I have not found an actual use in other widespread scripts and programs
so I can agree zeroing it out is harmless and safer.

I new patch will follow.

-- 
Br,

Andres
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Re: [PATCH util-modular] release.sh: redefine GPGKEY if already existing

[Andres Gomez]

Correcting the subject. This patch is for util-modular.

-- 
Br,

Andres
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

[PATCH] release.sh: redefine GPGKEY if already existing

[Andres Gomez]

GPGKEY may already exist in the environment. In that case, just
redefine it adding "-u"

Signed-off-by: Andres Gomez <ago...@igalia.com>
Cc: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com>
Cc: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutte...@who-t.net>
---
 release.sh | 5 +
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/release.sh b/release.sh
index f976f94..e5e699d 100755
--- a/release.sh
+++ b/release.sh
@@ -808,6 +808,11 @@ if [ "x$GPG" = "x" ] ; then
 fi
 fi
 
+# Redefine GPGKEY if needed
+if [ "x$GPGKEY" != "x" ] ; then
+GPGKEY="-u $GPGKEY"
+fi
+
 # Set the default make tarball creation command
 MAKE_DIST_CMD=distcheck
 
-- 
2.11.0

___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel