- TSC - lists.trustedfirmware.org

Re: [TF-TSC] Fwd: Trusted Firmware website redesign - proposed way forward

by Anton Komlev

Hello, 2 items from me: 1. There was a plan for a project dashboard showing “run-time” information / statistics / KPI. If it is hidden somewhere then worth to bring it up to a project area. 2. The topics split below is a bit unclear to me and looks overlapped. [cid:image001.png@01D62DCC.5B74FC20] Hope it helps, Anton From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Bill Fletcher via TSC Sent: 15 May 2020 18:08 To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org Cc: Jonathon Burcham <jon.burcham(a)linaro.org>; Stuart Waldron <stuart.waldron(a)linaro.org>; Kyle Kirkby <kyle.kirkby(a)linaro.org> Subject: [TF-TSC] Fwd: Trusted Firmware website redesign - proposed way forward Hi all, At the previous TF TSC we had an action to work on the TF.org website. Here is a mock up of a new website front page, and also a possible graphics template for an example per-project "mini-site" in the attached PDF. It could be useful to stimulate some discussion. The other piece of the puzzle is a schema representing all the data/links per project so we can have consistent links to content across the mini-sites. A mock up of this schema looks like this: Projects Schema: Project Title Project Description Project Documentation Project Code Project Mailing List Project Call to Actions Project Code Review Project Useful Links Any comments ahead of the meeting are welcome. Regards Bill -- [Linaro]<http://www.linaro.org/> Bill Fletcher | Field Engineering T: +44 7833 498336<tel:+44+7833+498336> bill.fletcher(a)linaro.org<mailto:bill.fletcher@linaro.org> | Skype: billfletcher2020

6 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [TF-TSC] Fwd: Trusted Firmware website redesign - proposed way forward

by Matteo Carlini

Few comments Arm shared with Linaro already: - overall new layout/schema looks good. - not quite sure about the colour distinction for projects (blue/green) on the main page --> maybe best to keep a single colour not to confuse people - How about adding a Members section down below the main page with all the company logos? - “Projects available from Trusted Firmware” reads a bit wordy --> suggests “Projects” or “Available Projects” - “A bi-weekly Technical Forum call is held to discuss technical subjects" --> May be can provide link to Tech Forum page and mention invite available from mailing list? - TF-A-Test is *probably* not worth a separate project page --> propose to move TF-A-Tests together with TF-A, in the same sub-page. Only TF-A button in the home page, then either 2 sections/tabs: one for TF-A and one for TF-A-Tests. Opinions? Any other thought anyone?? Thanks Matteo From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Julius Werner via TSC Sent: 15 May 2020 21:24 To: bill.fletcher(a)linaro.org Cc: Jonathon Burcham <jon.burcham(a)linaro.org>; Kyle Kirkby <kyle.kirkby(a)linaro.org>; tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; Stuart Waldron <stuart.waldron(a)linaro.org> Subject: Re: [TF-TSC] Fwd: Trusted Firmware website redesign - proposed way forward I think there's an "n" missing in "Hafnium" in your mock. On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:07 AM Bill Fletcher via TSC <tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> wrote: Hi all, At the previous TF TSC we had an action to work on the TF.org website. Here is a mock up of a new website front page, and also a possible graphics template for an example per-project "mini-site" in the attached PDF. It could be useful to stimulate some discussion. The other piece of the puzzle is a schema representing all the data/links per project so we can have consistent links to content across the mini-sites. A mock up of this schema looks like this: Projects Schema: Project Title Project Description Project Documentation Project Code Project Mailing List Project Call to Actions Project Code Review Project Useful Links Any comments ahead of the meeting are welcome. Regards Bill -- [Image removed by sender. Linaro]<http://www.linaro.org/> Bill Fletcher | Field Engineering T: +44 7833 498336<tel:+44+7833+498336> bill.fletcher(a)linaro.org<mailto:bill.fletcher@linaro.org> | Skype: billfletcher2020 -- TSC mailing list TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:TSC@lists.trustedfirmware.org> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc

6 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [TF-TSC] Fwd: Trusted Firmware website redesign - proposed way forward

by Julius Werner

I think there's an "n" missing in "Hafnium" in your mock. On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:07 AM Bill Fletcher via TSC < tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > At the previous TF TSC we had an action to work on the TF.org website. > Here is a mock up of a new website front page, and also a possible graphics > template for an example per-project "mini-site" in the attached PDF. It > could be useful to stimulate some discussion. The other piece of the puzzle > is a schema representing all the data/links per project so we can have > consistent links to content across the mini-sites. A mock up of this schema > looks like this: > > Projects Schema: > > Project Title > Project Description > Project Documentation > Project Code > Project Mailing List > Project Call to Actions > Project Code Review > Project Useful Links > > Any comments ahead of the meeting are welcome. > > Regards > > Bill > > > > -- > > [image: Linaro] <http://www.linaro.org/> > *Bill Fletcher* | *Field Engineering* > T: +44 7833 498336 <+44+7833+498336> > bill.fletcher(a)linaro.org | Skype: billfletcher2020 > > -- > TSC mailing list > TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc >

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 0

Fwd: Trusted Firmware website redesign - proposed way forward

by Bill Fletcher

Hi all, At the previous TF TSC we had an action to work on the TF.org website. Here is a mock up of a new website front page, and also a possible graphics template for an example per-project "mini-site" in the attached PDF. It could be useful to stimulate some discussion. The other piece of the puzzle is a schema representing all the data/links per project so we can have consistent links to content across the mini-sites. A mock up of this schema looks like this: Projects Schema: Project Title Project Description Project Documentation Project Code Project Mailing List Project Call to Actions Project Code Review Project Useful Links Any comments ahead of the meeting are welcome. Regards Bill -- [image: Linaro] <http://www.linaro.org/> *Bill Fletcher* | *Field Engineering* T: +44 7833 498336 <+44+7833+498336> bill.fletcher(a)linaro.org | Skype: billfletcher2020

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [TF-TSC] [TF-A] Project Maintenance Proposal for tf.org Projects

by Sandrine Bailleux

Hi all, On 5/5/20 9:04 AM, Sandrine Bailleux via TF-A wrote: > I've received very little feedback on version 2 of the proposal, which > hints that we are reaching an agreement. Thus, I plan to finalize the > proposal this week. This can then become part of our development flow > for all trustedfirmware.org projects. > > Thanks again for all the inputs! The project maintenance process is now live. The document has been moved here (with a few minor edits to turn it from a proposal to an effective process): https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/project-maintenance-p… Thanks! Regards, Sandrine

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [TF-TSC] Project Maintenance Proposal for tf.org Projects

by Sandrine Bailleux

Hi all, I've received very little feedback on version 2 of the proposal, which hints that we are reaching an agreement. Thus, I plan to finalize the proposal this week. This can then become part of our development flow for all trustedfirmware.org projects. Thanks again for all the inputs! Regards, Sandrine Bailleux

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 0

Trusted Firmware TSC 16th April - Minutes

by Bill Fletcher

Attendees Ruchika Gupta (NXP) Andrej Butok (NXP) Abhishek Pandit (Arm) Kevin Townsend (Linaro) Joakim Bech (Linaro) Christian Daudt (Cypress/Infineon) Eric FInco (ST) Julius Werner (Google) Mark Grosen (TI) Bill Mills (TI) David Brown (Linaro) Bill Fletcher (Linaro Community Projects) Actions AbhishekP: Action to follow up on TF hosting released PSA specification AbhishekP: Action to check with Shebu if the roadmap included 1.0 BillF: Action to storyboard/mock up web page for next TSC BillF: Action to check how to prepare the support of some member’s boards in CI and come back to CD/EF KevinT: Action/semi-volunteering to put some road-signs for helping people moving from gitHub to gerrit AbhishekP: Action to put the gerrit/GitHub issue on the agenda for next time Notes JB: Some practicalities around: - Our mailinglists, Bill have created/enabled some already and I have a discussion with Linux kernel developers regarding mailinglist for TEE kernel discussions. I can give a 2 minute update on this. - OP-TEE transition, I've tried to clean-up and redirect everything from Linaro to TrustedFirmware.org. Yet another 2 minute update. BF: All lists have been created - see TF.org/contact for all (public ones) JB: Suggested there should also be a tee mailing list in the kernel. DB: Vger list? JB: yes JB: also cleaned up OP-TEE.org to use new mailing list and mention trusted firmware where relevant AP: Maybe we need an ‘all’ mailing list for process, otherwise getting 3 mails every time? DB: In the kernel people are good at cross posting. CD: Suggest to wait if there are more of these things and see if we need a top level list DB: May be unintended consequences. AP: Leave it for now JB: Bill also created op-tee-security list. Need to describe membership/use DB: Has been done for Zephyr. JB: Not the same as what was agreed with Dan JB: Sandrine's maintainer / process proposal, do we want to have a follow-up discussion? AP: Was a special TF-A Tech Forum call last week. Has incorporated the suggestions from the list and forum. Would anyone want us not to formalize it? CD: In principle? AP: Sandrine published the updates she got. Suggest she finalises with each contributor rather than continuing to blast it to the list. EF: -Some time ago, you asked for feedback on trustedfirmware.org website and BillF created a wiki document to capture comments = https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/website/ I have edited it with some comments and proposals. EF: could have per project logos routing people to mini-sites per project AP: Initial project landing pages often have member logos. EF: Dashboard is confusing - not analytics. Also different between TF-A and TF-M. Docs and wiki - not sure people visiting will understand the difference. EF: TF-M Wiki page is good. Could be mini-site entry point. AP: Was looking at Apache since has multiple projects too CD: Agree that the slicing is not good at the moment. People typically coming in for a specific project. First item for each one could be a ‘start here’ like Eric pointed out for TF-M DB: Don’t want drop downs need to be clicked on - should just select by hovering. AB: The PSA Specification is still under Arm. Also requires registration and doesn’t inform you if there’s a new version. Could it be moved to TF.org? AP: Will check with Arm BF: Not sure we can host it CD: It’s a public spec - so could host a copy AP: release versions could be ok but draft versions may be via a closed channel AP: Action to follow up on TF hosting released PSA specification BF: Action to storyboard/mock up web page for next TSC EF: Furthermore, last time Dan proposed to discussed the tools used by the projects (git, gerrit phabricator) and I see a link with the web site improvement topic so if members of the TSC agree we may start discussing this in today TSC AP: Phabricator is becoming an overhead. Would be good if it was more based on Sphinx/git. But some people do like the wiki. RG: Any plans to shift op-tee from github to tf.org. JB: Depends who - for me no. RG: Expect any change? DB: Gerrit seems to do better with long patch chains JB: A lot of new stuff is being added on GitHub. KT: Burden for new people getting a first patch in using Gerrit CD: Standard ramp up for a new tool. DB: But many more people using GitHub KT: Could do a better job in the documentation (semi-volunteering to put some road-signs) AP: Put the gerrit/GitHub issue on the agenda for next time? EF: As now the budget for the next phase to TF OpenCI has been voted, do we have an update on the execution plan and further to it how to prepare the support of some member’s board (Christian and I made raised a question pointing to it while reviewing Linaro proposal) BF: Action: will check this explicit step out and come back to CD/EF AOB: MG: How was the decision made to say TF-M is at 1.0? AP: Think it was related to PSA specification. MG: What’s the criteria for what is a version release? AP: Action: Will check with Shebu since this would be published as the roadmap. He joins the board but not the TSC. Think the roadmap included 1.0. MG: Are we going to have a process for doing a release - quality/features/bugs/benchmarks. Should be documented and reviewed before a release. JB: If nothing else need some kind of checklist so that it’s possible to include new people’s participation in a release. MG: Zephyr project has been looking at this quite a bit. Think we should document a process for getting a release out. As people look at using this in production. AP: Cross-TF? MG: Prefer not to do it 5 times (for each subproject). At least a baseline common across projects. JB: This is what exists for the OP-TEE project, we wanted to make some kind of "checklist" at some point also, to actually check off various items: https://optee.readthedocs.io/en/latest/general/releases.html#release-proced… CD: There is the aspect what is the feature set - shebu has been putting it together but don’t think we have a feature set to discuss/steer. i.e. what is important. This is orthogonal to the release process checklist. Some people sidestep this with a periodic release - either it made the release or it didn’t. EF: Semantic versioning? AP: Was discussed but think we stayed with the TF-A versioning. JB: Op-TEE follows semantic versioning. AB: Difficulty to use Zoom from NXP. Have asked for an exception. Was blocked today. Preference is MS Teams. JB: Issue to find one tool that works for all. MS Teams is only free ‘for now’. BF: Hoping to progress on this in the coming days. Already other ongoing discussions with NXP with respect to other Linaro meetings. -- [image: Linaro] <http://www.linaro.org/> *Bill Fletcher* | *Field Engineering* T: +44 7833 498336 <+44+7833+498336> bill.fletcher(a)linaro.org | Skype: billfletcher2020

6 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 16 Apr 2020

by Eric FINCO

Hi Abhishek, Sorry for the late feedback. -Some time ago, you asked for feedback on trustedfirmware.org website and BillF created a wiki document to capture comments = https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/website/ I have edited it with some comments and proposals. Futhermore, last time Dan proposed to discussed the tools used by the projects (git, gerrit phabricator) and I see a link with the web site improvement topic so if members of the TSC agree we may start discussing this in today TSC -As now the budget for the next phase to TF OpenCI has been voted, do we have an update on the execution plan and further to it how to prepare the support of some member’s board (Christian and I made raised a question pointing to it while reviewing Linaro proposal) Regards, Eric Finco [Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: logo_big5] Eric FINCO | Tel: +33 (0)2 4402 7154 MDG | Technical Specialist From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Joakim Bech via TSC Sent: mercredi 15 avril 2020 17:25 To: Abhishek Pandit <Abhishek.Pandit(a)arm.com> Cc: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: Re: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 16 Apr 2020 Hi Abhishek, Some practicalities around: - Our mailinglists, Bill have created/enabled some already and I have a discussion with Linux kernel developers regarding mailinglist for TEE kernel discussions. I can give a 2 minute update on this. - OP-TEE transition, I've tried to clean-up and redirect everything from Linaro to TrustedFirmware.org. Yet another 2 minute update. Sandrine's maintainer / process proposal, do we want to have a follow-up discussion? Regards, Joakim On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 17:04, Abhishek Pandit via TSC <tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> wrote: Hi All, Any agenda items for this week’s meeting? Thanks, Abhishek -- TSC mailing list TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:TSC@lists.trustedfirmware.org> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc

6 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 16 Apr 2020

by Joakim Bech

Hi Abhishek, Some practicalities around: - Our mailinglists, Bill have created/enabled some already and I have a discussion with Linux kernel developers regarding mailinglist for TEE kernel discussions. I can give a 2 minute update on this. - OP-TEE transition, I've tried to clean-up and redirect everything from Linaro to TrustedFirmware.org. Yet another 2 minute update. Sandrine's maintainer / process proposal, do we want to have a follow-up discussion? Regards, Joakim On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 17:04, Abhishek Pandit via TSC < tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote: > Hi All, > > > > Any agenda items for this week’s meeting? > > > > Thanks, > > Abhishek > -- > TSC mailing list > TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org > https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc >

6 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [TF-TSC] [TF-A] Project Maintenance Proposal for tf.org Projects

by Sandrine Bailleux

Hi all, Thanks to all who have commented on this proposal so far. I've edited the original document to try and incorporate all feedback gathered so far (through the TSC meeting, this email thread and the TF-A tech call). Please have another look and flag anything I might have missed: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/project-maintenance-p… The major changes are: == Removed concept of self-review == This is proving too controversial, several people do not want to allow self-review. Roles of maintainer and code owner are still cumulative but cannot be both exercised for the same patch. The exact method of dealing with review bottleneck is still to be decided. In addition to the current proposal of increasing the maintainers pool, the most popular alternatives mentioned so far are: - Set a minimum wait time for feedback before a patch can be merged without any further delay. - Mandate distinct reviewers for a patch. == Enhanced the section "Patch contribution Guidelines" == Mentioned that patches should be small, on-topic, with comprehensive commit messages. == Added a note about how to deal with disagreement == If reviewers cannot find a common ground, the proposal is to call out a 3rd-party maintainer. == Removed "out-of-date" platform state == Squashed it into "limited support" to reduce the number of states. == Removed "orphan" state from platform support life cycle == This concept is orthogonal to the level of functionality. Added a note in the "Code Owner" section instead. == Per-project guidelines as a complementary document == Added a list of things that it would typically cover. == Added requirement on fully supported platforms to document the features they support == == Added todo mentioning that the proposal might cover branching strategies in the future == The full diff may be seen here: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/phriction/diff/73/?l=4&r=5 This proposal is still open for discussion at this stage and further feedback is most welcome! Regards, Sandrine

6 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

TSC