Linaro Ubuntu LEB: Improving the relationship with Ubuntu
Topics:
- Go over the issues we had during the Oneiric cycle
- 1 month x 6 months cycle
- Feature planning (present how Linaro plans the engineering work)
- How to manage SRU and FFe
- Package upload (should we create a Linaro upload group for Linaro packages?)
Blueprint information
- Status:
- Not started
- Approver:
- Ricardo Salveti
- Priority:
- Undefined
- Drafter:
- None
- Direction:
- Needs approval
- Assignee:
- Ricardo Salveti
- Definition:
- Discussion
- Series goal:
- None
- Implementation:
- Unknown
- Milestone target:
- None
- Started by
- Completed by
Whiteboard
Linaro planning :
Monthly goals/assignments in blueprints but longer term in backlog
Would help Ubuntu:
+ Better visability to long term Linaro plans.
+ Need advise / guidance on new features, espeically for features that would go into LTS releases.
+ Before Linaro move forward to new RC, Linaro should advise Ubuntu to capture a snapshot of the current kernel version.
Planning:
+ linaro is doing monthly/agile engineering execution and planning, but platform will maintain a roadmap with quarterly high level topics/goals that blueprints/work we plan for the next month typically should refer to.
+ this does not give detailed information about concrete, small features
Kernel:
what happens to kernel support/maintenance with linaro moving to TIP only approach both in kernel WG and landing teams
+ ubuntu takes stable release (and even RC versions from before)
+ linaro continously tracks tip for mainline kernels as well as ubuntu packaged kernel
+ if ubuntu wants to see higher enablement level guaranteed to be available in final 3.x release, adding tests will help ensuring it
+ linaro does not do maintenance after release (move on to next version) once stable release is out
+ ubuntu needs to do backports from that point on: same as before precise;
+ linaro
+ stable kernel does not exist anymore
+ ACTION: ogra and victor to check if backout policy also applies for armel port
+ if so linaro can start tracking precise from the beginning
+ automation of armel exists?
+ ACTION: asac to check if pulling panda images can get pulled into LAVA from ubuntu
+ omap3 could be automated with qemu; ubuntu is keen on keeping it because its a good mainline reference kernel
+ beagle XMs are also available in LAVA lab
gst-openmax:
+ Linaro graphics WG will not ship a single package for all SoCs
+ Ubuntu would like to see those packages in the archive early on during development cycle
+ ACTION: Linaro to work on policy/process to get packages into the development release
+ this depends on ubuntu solving quality issues (build images + boot being guaranteed will help us)
Sponsoring:
+ Ubuntu willing to do sponsoring
+ Linaro should _really_ use the sponsoring process for Ubuntu armel packages
+ Linaro to become a membership/
+ attract community that Ubuntu might not catch
+ ACTION: Linaro to setup a membership board so linaro can approve uploaders
+ ACTION: talk to community council to find out what policies need to be in place
SRUs:
+ linaro will update kernel till feature freeze
+ exercise and establish SRU best practices
libjpeg-turbo:
+ plan agreed with doko and RMs
+ linaro will deliver benchmarks for libjpeg62 libjpeg8 and libjpeg-turbe (with and without NEON)
+ linaro will setup lab testing
Release Transparency:
+ Plan needs to get posted to ubuntu-dev mailing list
Backlog:
+ avoid duplication
+ ship a livecd approach?
Can we really use the ubuntu binaries forever? LEBs might pre-feature new toolchain flags;
+ how can we stay at least as close as possible
+ build infrastructure is hard to reproduce and just live-build alone does not produce exactly what Ubuntu images are
+ ACTION: tgall and adam to work on a plan/solution and present
Refactor flash-kernel:
Would help Linaro:
+ Ubuntu has the policy that "broken" packages will be backed out.
- broken defined as packages that don't compile or pkgs which are functionally incorrect
- ogra/victor will validate backout policy and how ti applies to armel