Status: https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/Middleware/Graphics/WeeklyReport
Meeting minutes: https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/Middleware/Graphics/Notes/2011-09-28
== Highlights == * Planning 11.10
* Working out how to handle backlogs - details discussed about series, backlog milestones, creation of blueprints in backlog and targeting blueprints to monthly milestones
* For next quarter, there have been some draft requirements in review such as
* UMM * Buffer sharing : https://linaro-public.papyrs.com/public/4147/GWG2011-UMM-BUFFER-SHARING# * DMA mapping API: https://linaro-public.papyrs.com/public/4524/GWG2011-UMM-DMA-MAPPING#
* Benchmarking: https://linaro-public.papyrs.com/public/4143/GWG2011-BENCHMARK-DASHBOARD, also in Launchpad https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-graphics-misc/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-ben...
* Webkit port using CAIRO-GLES: https://linaro-public.papyrs.com/public/4146/GWG2011-WEBKIT-CAIRO-GLES/# also in Launchpad https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-graphics-misc/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-web...
* Other Launchpad blueprints * Unity-GLES: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/unity-gles/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-unity-gles * GLProxy: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glproxy/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-glproxy
Please let me know if there are any questions.
Best,
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 12:17:11PM +0300, Ilias Biris wrote:
- Benchmarking:
https://linaro-public.papyrs.com/public/4143/GWG2011-BENCHMARK-DASHBOARD, also in Launchpad https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-graphics-misc/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-ben...
- Webkit port using CAIRO-GLES:
https://linaro-public.papyrs.com/public/4146/GWG2011-WEBKIT-CAIRO-GLES/# also in Launchpad https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-graphics-misc/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-web...
Once we have the show on the road (i.e. the roadmap items estimatded, approved and scheduled for Q4) would it make sense to kill the blueprints above? I don't like the idea of having duplication (or a 1-to-1 mapping) there, and ISTM that you really want to have blueprints that are smaller sized than what these are.
Those are only the session blueprints for the scheduler. Once we've captured all the info we need (broken each up into individual feature blueprints that would satisfy the requirements), those will go away (be marked "implemented"). I don't see how we get around it (well, I suppose we could keep our planning manual and ad hoc, but I wanted to make sure folks could use the scheduler to make sure they were able to attend other important sessions).
cheers, Jesse
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Christian Robottom Reis kiko@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 12:17:11PM +0300, Ilias Biris wrote:
* Benchmarking: https://linaro-public.papyrs.com/public/4143/GWG2011-BENCHMARK-DASHBOARD, also in Launchpad https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-graphics-misc/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-ben...
* Webkit port using CAIRO-GLES: https://linaro-public.papyrs.com/public/4146/GWG2011-WEBKIT-CAIRO-GLES/# also in Launchpad https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-graphics-misc/+spec/linaro-gfxmm-web...
Once we have the show on the road (i.e. the roadmap items estimatded, approved and scheduled for Q4) would it make sense to kill the blueprints above? I don't like the idea of having duplication (or a 1-to-1 mapping) there, and ISTM that you really want to have blueprints that are smaller sized than what these are. -- Christian Robottom Reis, Engineering VP Brazil (GMT-3) | [+55] 16 9112 6430 | [+1] 612 216 4935 Linaro.org: Open Source Software for ARM SoCs
linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 09:19:18AM -0700, Jesse Barker wrote:
Those are only the session blueprints for the scheduler.
Of course, I had forgotten about this silliness. Hopefully this is being less expensive now that we have less sessions and the UI is a little bit better.
Long-term, I really want to see us have the ability to conveniently schedule a session independently or not of having a blueprint for us.
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Christian Robottom Reis kiko@linaro.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 09:19:18AM -0700, Jesse Barker wrote:
Those are only the session blueprints for the scheduler.
Of course, I had forgotten about this silliness. Hopefully this is being less expensive now that we have less sessions and the UI is a little bit better.
Absolutely. We only have 4 sessions and could possibly have gotten away with slightly fewer.
Long-term, I really want to see us have the ability to conveniently schedule a session independently or not of having a blueprint for us.
Sure. This is strictly a function of leveraging the summit scheduler. For Cambourne and presumably for SF in February, we won't have to worry about this.
cheers, Jesse
-
Christian Robottom Reis -
Ilias Biris -
Jesse Barker