Hi John, John Kehayias <john.kehay...@protonmail.com> writes:
> Hi Maxim, > > On Sun, Jul 30, 2023 at 09:50 PM, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> John Kehayias <john.kehay...@protonmail.com> writes: >> >> [...] >> >>> I'll open a branch merge request issue later today as per new >>> procedure for QA. Though I believe that only builds 2 branches, which >>> is occupied at the moment. Or can someone set a separate build job >>> specifically for mesa-updates, especially if we think it is a good >>> idea to have this going forward? >> >> Do you already have admin access to Cuirass? We can issue client certs >> for team members needing to create branches on it or restart builds >> there, etc. >> > > I do not have access. The mesa-updates branch remains (and still an > active job I think, just nothing pushed since the merge). I plan on > making use of it as soon as 23.2 is out, along with a handful of > pending patches I've seen that will make sense here. I'll email you your TLS client cert that you can install into your favorite browser. > I haven't used Cuirass before but if a hand would be helpful I'm happy > to lend it (let me know if there is someone I should contact directly > or message me off list). It's unfortunately kind of necessary to baby sit the builds and restart those that failed due to bugs in our CI infrastructure such as #54447 ("cuirass: missing derivation error"). The more hands, the better. >>>> Do we want a "Mesa team" or something a bit larger? Not sure what >>>> exactly, since "graphics" is perhaps too broad. Happy to help >>>> spearhead the Mesa front for Guix (the very package that got me first >>>> involved in the patching process). >>> >>> This is still a good question I think, of how we want to have a >>> team(s) to handle things like xorg, wayland, mesa, and related >>> packages. They are a bit all over the place in terms of scope and what >>> they touch. For now I'd like to go ahead with a regular mesa-updates >>> branch since that sees regular releases and is pretty self-contained >>> currently. >> >> It seems a 'desktop' team could make sense, covering some of the things >> listed here that makes sense / are already well separated in modules in >> Guix to avoid being added to two teams: >> <https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/>. > > The problem I'm thinking of for a "desktop" team is setting the > correct scope of package files to make use of e.g. auto cc-ing on > patch submissions. Though at least (gnu packages gl) looks pretty > reasonable to start for maybe a graphics team? Maybe with vulkan? Yeah, it's not super focused, but I think it may be best to start to broad and refine later to have more teams coverage. > I'm still not sure but I should probably propose something concrete > with at least myself for gl since those patches generally will go to > the mesa-updates branch for convenient building. A "graphics" or "desktop" team which would include freedesktop and the gl modules sounds good to me. -- Thanks, Maxim