Syslinux - Sep 2015 - Open thougts about the project governance & workflow

Hi folks,

I've been involved in Syslinux since 14 years and been almost off for many
years for multiple reasons. I'm currently trying to recover and while
observing the project with a little of distance I noticed the following :

- project's activity is pretty low
- patches sent to the mailing list (ML) are not likely to be reviewed
- Integration workflow is pretty unclear
- release cycles are pretty long

Please note that I'm not ranting against anyone. We are all working on our
free time and do our best.

We started a discussion about that topic on the irc channel but I'd prefer
to push it to the ML to get feedbacks from others.
>From my perspective we are in this situation for the following reasons :
- we are lacking of people on the project (dev & qa)
- we are badly using people time
- the feeback loop between dev, users & qa is pretty broken leading to
frustation from everyone

As a dev, here come the issue I have with the project
- I don't know who is able to take care of my patches
- I don't know when they will be reviewed & merged

As a user, I do think it's pretty hard to understand when a issue will be
fixed & released.

As dev have very few time to work on Syslinux, I'd like to see the workflow
being more defined and more distributed to workaround the missing of peter.
He's very loaded so we have to help him. We cannot push the whole
responsability on him to take care of patches, merging, testing and release.

I really wonder if we could make our workflow being less 90's like. I mean
sending patches to a ML and waiting for someone to take care of it and
finally forgetting it.

Ady made a serious job tracking them for a while and then decided to stop
because it was too much energy for very few returns. Gene is also
maintaining a tree on his side but what is integrated or not is pretty hard
to track when working on the project from time to time.

I'm wondering if using a github-like service couldn't be useful for us.
I
mean having a place where we can see all the issues & pending pull-requests
(PR). I'm using that services all day long and that's pretty efficient.
If
the PR associated to an issue is OK you can merge it instantly, if not just
asking for a rework to the dev.

I know we have already a bugzilla but I don't find the integration with git
very "fluent".

Anyway, I'm sending this email trying to get your thoughts about this and
trying to redefine the workflow & role of the current people on the project
(dev, qa, maintainer, ..).

Sorry for such long email on the ML, please take it in the positive side of
it, we have to rework the team & roles to avoid the project dying by people
leaving.

Erwan

On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Erwan Velu via Syslinux
<syslinux at zytor.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've been involved in Syslinux since 14 years and been almost off for
many
> years for multiple reasons. I'm currently trying to recover and while
> observing the project with a little of distance I noticed the following :
>
> - project's activity is pretty low
> - patches sent to the mailing list (ML) are not likely to be reviewed
> - Integration workflow is pretty unclear
> - release cycles are pretty long
>
> Please note that I'm not ranting against anyone. We are all working on
our
> free time and do our best.
>
> We started a discussion about that topic on the irc channel but I'd
prefer
> to push it to the ML to get feedbacks from others.
>
> From my perspective we are in this situation for the following reasons :
> - we are lacking of people on the project (dev & qa)
> - we are badly using people time
> - the feeback loop between dev, users & qa is pretty broken leading to
> frustation from everyone
>
> As a dev, here come the issue I have with the project
> - I don't know who is able to take care of my patches
> - I don't know when they will be reviewed & merged
I've been the sole one merging for the past few months.  I see a point
here that I should probably be pointing towards a commit ID or commit
mailing list message in the archive.  I should probably also
acknowledge receipt of a patch in addition to tagging the message as a
patch for review.
> As a user, I do think it's pretty hard to understand when a issue will
be
> fixed & released.
>
> As dev have very few time to work on Syslinux, I'd like to see the
workflow
> being more defined and more distributed to workaround the missing of peter.
> He's very loaded so we have to help him. We cannot push the whole
> responsability on him to take care of patches, merging, testing and
release.
Some of this has been done but the biggest question remaining in my
mind is solely around releases.
> I really wonder if we could make our workflow being less 90's like. I
mean
> sending patches to a ML and waiting for someone to take care of it and
> finally forgetting it.
>
> Ady made a serious job tracking them for a while and then decided to stop
> because it was too much energy for very few returns. Gene is also
> maintaining a tree on his side but what is integrated or not is pretty hard
> to track when working on the project from time to time.
I still maintain my personal repos on github and zytor and push to the
now-official repo.cz repo.
> I'm wondering if using a github-like service couldn't be useful for
us. I
> mean having a place where we can see all the issues & pending
pull-requests
> (PR). I'm using that services all day long and that's pretty
efficient. If
> the PR associated to an issue is OK you can merge it instantly, if not just
> asking for a rework to the dev.
>
> I know we have already a bugzilla but I don't find the integration with
git
> very "fluent".
Unless there's a missing piece that someone made that's out there,
it's human.
> Anyway, I'm sending this email trying to get your thoughts about this
and
> trying to redefine the workflow & role of the current people on the
project
> (dev, qa, maintainer, ..).
>
> Sorry for such long email on the ML, please take it in the positive side of
> it, we have to rework the team & roles to avoid the project dying by
people
> leaving.
>
> Erwan

-- 
-Gene

On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:58:14AM -0400, Gene Cumm via Syslinux
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Erwan Velu via Syslinux
> <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I've been involved in Syslinux since 14 years and been almost off
for many
> > years for multiple reasons. I'm currently trying to recover and
while
> > observing the project with a little of distance I noticed the
following :
> >
> > - project's activity is pretty low
> > - patches sent to the mailing list (ML) are not likely to be reviewed
> > - Integration workflow is pretty unclear
> > - release cycles are pretty long
> >
> > Please note that I'm not ranting against anyone. We are all
working on our
> > free time and do our best.
> >
> > We started a discussion about that topic on the irc channel but
I'd prefer
> > to push it to the ML to get feedbacks from others.
> >
> > From my perspective we are in this situation for the following reasons
:
> > - we are lacking of people on the project (dev & qa)
> > - we are badly using people time
> > - the feeback loop between dev, users & qa is pretty broken
leading to
> > frustation from everyone
> >
> > As a dev, here come the issue I have with the project
> > - I don't know who is able to take care of my patches
> > - I don't know when they will be reviewed & merged
> 
> I've been the sole one merging for the past few months.  I see a point
> here that I should probably be pointing towards a commit ID or commit
> mailing list message in the archive.  I should probably also
> acknowledge receipt of a patch in addition to tagging the message as a
> patch for review.
> 
> > As a user, I do think it's pretty hard to understand when a issue
will be
> > fixed & released.
> >
> > As dev have very few time to work on Syslinux, I'd like to see the
workflow
> > being more defined and more distributed to workaround the missing of
peter.
> > He's very loaded so we have to help him. We cannot push the whole
> > responsability on him to take care of patches, merging, testing and
release.
> 
> Some of this has been done but the biggest question remaining in my
> mind is solely around releases.
> 
> > I really wonder if we could make our workflow being less 90's
like. I mean
> > sending patches to a ML and waiting for someone to take care of it and
> > finally forgetting it.
> >
> > Ady made a serious job tracking them for a while and then decided to
stop
> > because it was too much energy for very few returns. Gene is also
> > maintaining a tree on his side but what is integrated or not is pretty
hard
> > to track when working on the project from time to time.
> 
> I still maintain my personal repos on github and zytor and push to the
> now-official repo.cz repo.
> 
> > I'm wondering if using a github-like service couldn't be
useful for us. I
> > mean having a place where we can see all the issues & pending
pull-requests
> > (PR). I'm using that services all day long and that's pretty
efficient. If
> > the PR associated to an issue is OK you can merge it instantly, if not
just
> > asking for a rework to the dev.
> >
> > I know we have already a bugzilla but I don't find the integration
with git
> > very "fluent".
> 
> Unless there's a missing piece that someone made that's out there,
it's human.
> 
> > Anyway, I'm sending this email trying to get your thoughts about
this and
> > trying to redefine the workflow & role of the current people on
the project
> > (dev, qa, maintainer, ..).
> >
> > Sorry for such long email on the ML, please take it in the positive
side of
> > it, we have to rework the team & roles to avoid the project dying
by people
> > leaving.
> >
> > Erwan
> 
> 
> -Gene

It is good that we have these discussions. Thing I want to add is
'patchwork'


Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Leven en laten leven