It'll be just a quick discussion on what works and what doesn't in our media development process.
My opinion is that it works fine for the most part (from my perspective), except that it takes too long for fixes for the current rc kernel to get pushed upstream.
Experience shows that most bugs are fixed early on in the cycle, usually before rc2 is released, so I think it would be very helpful if fixes are upstreamed in time for rc2 or rc3 at the latest.
The other thing I'd like to discuss is whether we should do a media summit in the future that does not overlap with an ELC/LPC/gstreamer conference. This would make scheduling much easier, but it would mean that we have a weekend between the conference(s) and the summit.
Regards,
Hans
Hi Hans,
On Saturday 11 October 2014 11:34:53 Hans Verkuil wrote:
It'll be just a quick discussion on what works and what doesn't in our media development process.
My opinion is that it works fine for the most part (from my perspective), except that it takes too long for fixes for the current rc kernel to get pushed upstream.
Experience shows that most bugs are fixed early on in the cycle, usually before rc2 is released, so I think it would be very helpful if fixes are upstreamed in time for rc2 or rc3 at the latest.
The other thing I'd like to discuss is whether we should do a media summit in the future that does not overlap with an ELC/LPC/gstreamer conference. This would make scheduling much easier, but it would mean that we have a weekend between the conference(s) and the summit.
Or have the summit during the weekend, but apart from that being too exhausting, I suspect that many of us wouldn't mind an excuse to spend the weekend sightseeing anyway ;-)