BSDCan '19 Core Update
1 like392 views
The document provides a status update on the FreeBSD core team as of May 2019, detailing the progression of core.10, survey results from the developer community, and various working groups that have been formed. It highlights the increase in meeting frequency to address numerous issues, the release delay of version 12.0, and ongoing efforts to modernize processes within the team. Additionally, it notes the significant engagement from the community through surveys and documentations while outlining specific working groups for release engineering and documentation modernization.
BSDCan '19 Core Update
- 2. Overview 1. core.10’s Progression 2. Developer and Community Survey Results 3. Package Download Stats 4. Core Team Charter Update 5. Working Groups 2
- 3. Forming 3 “The team meets and learns about the opportunities and challenges, and then agrees on goals and begins to tackle the tasks.” -- Tuckman's stages of group development
- 4. core.10 Members ● Allan Jude ● Benedict Reuschling ● Brooks Davis ● Hiroki Sato ● Jeff Roberson ● John Baldwin ● Kris Moore ● Sean Chittenden ● Warner Losh ● Secretary: Joseph Mingrone 4
- 5. core.10: 2018H2 Summary (1/3) 1. Meet and Greet 2. Overwhelmed at number of issues to discuss every meeting a. Once per month cadence led to 2+hr meetings b. September: moved to once every 2wks c. November: moved to once a week (still not enough, but we’re basically out of free cycles) d. Higher number of meetings per month allows us to work on issues more often/at a higher frequency than just once a month 5
- 6. Storming 6 “This is the second stage of team development, where the group starts to sort itself out and gain each other’s trust.” -- Tuckman's stages of group development
- 7. Survey ● Lots of opinions ● Short on data ● Explicit desire to: ○ not bikeshed in private ○ have a successful core term with concrete results, backed by data ● Straw poll at EuroBSD Dev Summit regarding willingness to participate in a survey. ○ 50 attendees ○ “Who wouldn’t participate in a survey?” 2 hands went up ● Early results confirm some of our assumptions ● Learned new things, too early to draw conclusions before full analysis 7
- 8. In ${FOO} we trust™. ● In developers we trust™. ● In crypto we trust™. ● In automation we trust™. ● In data we trust™. In chaos we assume. 8
- 9. core.10: 2018H2 Summary (2/3) 3. 12.0-RELEASE delay a. OpenSSL’s 1.1.0 release didn’t line up with 12.0-RELEASE b. Project belief that “all branches are created equal” c. Discussion/desire to change i386 kernel to a Tier 2 platform and announce this before 12.0-RELEASE cut. d. 5 year support term for branches is problematic e. Good news: delayed announcement regarding the support model for 12-STABLE does not appear to have impacted the adoption of 12.0 4. Oversaw the DRM driver transition and stood up the graphics WG 5. Draft replacement CoC candidates (LLVM, Go), progress stalled 9
- 10. Norming 10 “The team is aware of competition and they share a common goal. In this stage, all team members take the responsibility and have the ambition to work for the success of the team's goals. They start tolerating the whims and fancies of the other team members. They accept others as they are and make an effort to move on.” -- Tuckman's stages of group development
- 11. core.10: 2019Q1 Summary (3/3) 4. Support Cycle announcement for 12.0-RELEASE 5. YouTube channel for developer summit videos a. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxLxR_oW-NAmChIcSkAyZGQ b. Please subscribe! 6. Release Engineering Discussions 7. Survey 8. Stats 11
- 12. Things Working Well 1. Pretty aggressive about using Google Docs for content review a. Nearly every announcement that has been sent out by core@, core-secretary@, or “on behalf of core” has been drafted in a Google Doc and shared and approved by the Core Team 2. Slack: real-time communication 3. Aligned vision among the Core Team 4. Sequencing of issues. “We’re tackling ABC this month (or quarter), then moving to XYZ.” 5. Aligning meetings w/ core-secretary@ jrm@ doesn’t get enough credit for his role helping core@! Regular core reports as a result informing the community about what we do. 12
- 14. 2016 Survey Results ● FreeBSD Foundation conducted a survey in 2016 ● 1614 responses ● 10min avg length 14
- 15. 2019 Community Results 15 ● Results still being processed ● 79% completion rate ● 2881 completed surveys, 3638 responses ● 16min average completion time
- 16. 2016 FF Survey Results 16
- 19. 2016 FF Survey Results 19
- 20. 2016 FF Survey Results 20
- 21. 2019 Survey Results 21 Installs at home Installs at work/school
- 22. 2019 Community Survey 22 “a complete and self-contained contained operating system”
- 23. 23
- 31. 2016 FF Survey Results 31 If the Project were to modernize some of its processes, which tools would you like to see adopted?
- 38. 2019 Community Survey 38 Other: #1 Mailing Lists #2 BSD Now Podcast
- 40. 40
- 41. 41
- 43. Package Download Stats In the last ~6mo: ● 3.7M unique downloads ● 250TiB 43
- 44. Core Team Charter ● In process ● Charter, like other team charters, provides a framework for this and future Core Teams to: ○ Address issues ○ Establish working groups ○ Team charters ○ Establish feedback loops with teams and working groups 44
- 45. Working Groups 1. Core is not in the business of being experts 2. Modeled after ICANN, W3, and IETF 3. Organizational tool to deputize a group of people to solve a problem or issue a recommendation 4. Submit WG Charter to Core for discussion/approval 45
- 46. Rough Process 46 FreeBSD Core Team Release Engineering Charter Modernization Task Force Release Engineering Team 4. RE Charter Approved by Core Team RE Charter 1. Create Working Group 2. WG submits draft charter and operating plan 3. WG submits operating plan to RE Team Lead 5. RE Team Lead submits Initial Operating Plan to Core Team, per Charter RE Operating Plan RE Charter Proposal 0. Someone submits a WG proposal to Core
- 47. Release Engineering Re-Charter WG 47 Working Group Name Release Engineering Charter Modernization Start Date 2019-04-18 End Date 2019-05-10 Charter Extension ● 2019-05-24 Approval Date 2019-04-2 Working Group Chair Sean Chittenden Working Group Co-Chairs Allan Jude Mailing List N/A Slack Channel https://freebsd.slack.com / #wg-re19 IRC Channel N/A Name Email Role (chair, co-chair, member, auditor) 1 Sean Chittenden seanc@FreeBSD.org member, chair, Core Team 2 Allan Jude allanjude@FreeBSD.org member, co-chair, Core Team 3 Glen Barber gjb@FreeBSD.org member, RE Team 4 Konstantin Belousov kib@FreeBSD.org member, RE Team 5 Scott Long scottl@FreeBSD.org member, community 6 Ed Maste emaste@FreeBSD.org member, community A1 John Baldwin jhb@FreeBSD.org Auditor, Core Team A2 Li-Wen Hsu lwhsu@FreeBSD.org Auditor, CI (unconfirmed) A3 Warner Losh imp@FreeBSD.org Auditor, Core Team A4 Kris Moore kmoore@FreeBSD.org Auditor, Core Team A5 Marius Strobl marius@FreeBSD.org Auditor, RE Team
- 48. Docs Modernization WG 1. Docs commit rate has stagnated 2. Docbook is keeping many new contributors from making progress 3. Replace Docbook with Asciidoc (markdown + features of docbook) 4. Replace makefiles and XML style sheets with static site generator 5. WG tasked to transform current docs 6. Refashion docs.freebsd.org to house many related projects a. Team and Working group charters, status reports, meeting notes b. Formal (reference material) and informal (how-to, tutorials) documentation c. Papers/slides/videos/trip reports from conferences, hackathons, etc 48
- 49. Git WG 1. Core has unanimously approved the creation of a working group to figure out the details of moving to git. 2. Core will begin setup of this WG, pulling members from relevant other groups to help steer the WG direction. Assuming the working group does not encounter intractable problems, the working group’s recommendations, incorporating feedback from Core, will be approved and implemented. 49
- 50. Migration to Git WG 1. The git WG will work out the implementation details of adding this tool. Details to be discussed include: a. GitHub (Core recommends WG start with serious GH consideration) b. Mirroring c. Committer access d. Signing e. handling /contrib f. vendor branches g. Etc, Etc 50
- 51. What? Core is doing something about it? Q&A 51