State of the Union
lynxis at fe80.eu
Sun Mar 5 18:45:44 EST 2017
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:21:19 +0100
Hauke Mehrtens <hauke at hauke-m.de> wrote:
> > 1) Website
> > a) Keep > takes care. I would prefer to take the LEDE website and
> > show it underseparate pages or merge them? b) Who is taking care of
> > hosting? s taking care of the domain?
> > d) ...
> I like that the Website is integrated with the Wiki and someone else
> takes care. I would prefer to take the LEDE website and show it under
> both domain names.
I'm ok with this, but doesn't have a strong opinion.
> > 2) Forum
> > a) Discourse or punBB?
> > b) What is speaking about having both?
> > c) ...
> I would suggest to make a poll in both forums for which forum software
> to continue to use. I am not a big forum user and the users should
Sound good, but haven't used the forum for real. So no idea, what the
> > 3) Wiki
> > a) Complete LEDE wiki with OpenWrt information?
> > b) Complete OpenWrt wiki with LEDE information?
> > c) Redirect one to the other or keep both? (Mind that LEDE uses
> > its wiki as main web presence)
> I would like to have one wiki with the content of both merged
> together. I do not care which to take as a base, let the people how
> take care of the wiki device what is easier to do.
> > 4) Who is doing the legal paperwork, SPI etc.
> > a) Who is volunteering?
> > b) What are the requirements?
> > c) ...
> I would like to be represented by the SPI. I no one else wants to do
> this I would step up. I think we should have at least 3 people
> representing us at the SPI. I would use the SPI only to collect
> donations and to give legal advice if needed. If we merge we can take
> over the OpenWrt account. ;-)
Sound good. Can you create a seperate thread for this?
> 6) build bot infrastructure
> a) run the LEDE build bots on the OpenWrt servers in addition.
> b) have both build instances
> c) ....
> I would prefer to put the OpenWrt computing resources under the
> control of the LEDE build master.
> I agree with that.
> I would suggest to rebase the CC from OpenWrt on top of the CC form
> I think it was agreed on that we would take the LEDE codebase and the
> patches which are not in LEDE but in OpenWrt should be added manually.
> > - I am still unclear about what project I would be actually merging
> > with. By now all former and active OpenWrt developers should have
> > (or easily can get) push access to source.git but there has been
> > very little contributions from the "OpenWrt side" in both the
> > OpenWrt or LEDE repositories. Can we expect some actual effort
> > from the "OpenWrt side" in the future or will things quickly fall
> > back into a pattern where a few people having *@openwrt.org mail
> > addresses are claiming to represent the project while the actual
> > development work and (non-industrial) community interaction is
> > done by others?
> What about having a chart with the people ordered by number of commits
> in the last year, so that outsiders have an easy way to tell who
> contributes and who not?
> Number of commits is not a good way, but I can not some up with a
> better metric.
like many others projects, both projects lacks documentation a lot
apart from "the code is the documentation.". I really like to give docs
writers a voice. No idea how to do so. So this is a different topic,
just want to argue here that this is not a good metric. But if you want
to do so, do it.
> The OpenWrt name is interesting for me. When you talk to normal users
> many do not know LEDE, but they know what OpenWrt is, same is true for
> industry. The developers that really contribute mostly moved to LEDE
> already. I think it is similar to OpenOffice and LibreOffice.
I must admit, this is still true, but I'm here to change that.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the openwrt-adm