Re: [DISCUSSION] Issues, ToDo and Roadmap

[Claudius Heine <claudius.heine.ext@siemens.com>]

Hi Maxim,

On 11/02/2019 16.21, Maxim Yu. Osipov wrote:
> Hi Claudius,
> 
> On 2/11/19 11:19 AM, Claudius Heine wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to open a discussion about how we could improve the 
>> organization of Isar in regards to the projects short, mid and long 
>> term goals e.g. annoyances to be fixed, features to be implemented and 
>> bigger designs to work towards.
>>
>> We currently only have two public ways of communication, one of which 
>> is not maintained. Those are the mailing list and the github issue 
>> tracker.
>>
>> Mailing lists are great for open discussions and patches, but is a 
>> pretty fast moving medium and old discussions are no longer looked at 
>> and even get forgotten at some point so it might be sensible to put 
>> the results of discussions somewhere more persistent, search and with 
>> state tracking. Like a ticket system, issue tracker or wiki...
>>
>> The github issue tracker of Isar is in a very sorry state. Some of 
>> those open issues are no longer applicable or already fixed. Maybe we 
>> could reactivate that and have some more moderators to keep that up to 
>> date?
> 
> Totally agree.
> Let's use issue tracker - it's very helpful.

I would be, if it was maintained. Which is currently not the case.

> 
> I encourage everybody to comment/revise the current issues (like Henning 
> did for https://github.com/ilbers/isar/issues/8).

Well that issue is one of those that should be closed as WONTFIX or 
similar just as Henning commented half a year ago.

I also don't really see myself a someone that should maintain those 
issues, since I don't even have permissions to close them. That is also 
IMO the maintainers or reporters job, since they should have the big 
picture or their specific issues in mind.

But with just a quick look at some of them (skipping already discussed 
#8), many can be closed IMO. Or course that is just my perspective. I 
have no idea if it is solved to the reporters or maintainers 
satisfaction, but if it isn't they should at least comment on why it 
isn't. Closing those issues might trigger them to comment if the close 
was premature.

Close #10 Allow cross-build for selected packages
Close #11 Enable non-root building (WONTFIX, I don't see that happening 
anytime soon)
Close #12 qemu: init 0 doesn't exit with qemuarm-jessie (WONTFIX, not 
sure why that is a isar issue)
Close #14 bitbake: Multiconfig builds seem to be serialized (if that is 
still true, then that is a bitbake issue and needs to be fixed there not 
in isar)
Close #15 Support AUTOREV in SRCREV (WONTFIX, that is a feature issue 
that is open for 1.5 years with no update, there seem to be no interest 
for this)
Close #16 Jessie: Host configuration leakage around apt-get (WONTFIX, we 
don't use multistrap anymore)
Close #17 wic does not find mkdosfs (FIXED, as commented by Henning half 
a year ago)
Close #18 IMAGE_TYPE = "wic" (FIXED, as commented by Henning half a year 
ago)
Close or Update #19 Consider testing with http_proxy
Close #20 Override DISTRO_APT_SOURCE in local.conf? (no longer 
applicable AFAIK we now have DISTRO_APT_PREMIRRORS)
Close #21 Add support for package version pinning (fixed AFAIK, 
DISTRO_APT_PREFERENCES)
Close #27 bitbake: Consider reading bitbake's and project's config 
(fixed AFAIK, we don't use the bitbake.conf from bitbake but have our own)
Close #28 Document bitbake.conf concatenation (fixed AFAIK, since we 
don't concatenate anymore)

regards,
Claudius

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-54 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: ch@denx.de