Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Russell Senior]

> "Florian" == Florian Fainelli  writes:

>> However, I also agree with Dave, Alberto and Stefan that a name
>> change may be a really smart way to communicate the fresh start of
>> the project, a reboot, especially if the new name rides on the
>> popularity of "OpenWRT". It could be for example "OpenLD" (LD for
>> Linux Device) or "LibreWRT". Of course this is all conditional on the
>> merge of OpenWRT and LEDE. If the projects do not merge, the OpenWRT
>> folks and SPI may have a claim against the use of OpenLD or LibreWRT
>> or alike.

Florian> The point was that OpenWrt is already registered and managed by
Florian> SPI, so we may as well keep using it, and that is just what I
Florian> meant to say here, nothing more.  -- Florian

Not that a choice on a name, with taste and discretion, isn't going to be
needed, but I can't help but think of this:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality


PS: OpenLEDE. ;-)


-- 
Russell Senior, President
russ...@personaltelco.net
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Dana Myers]

On 12/21/2016 6:01 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:

So maybe it's a good idea to use the (still hypothetical, but hopefully
close) merge to advertise a rename which will both aim to carry-over the
brand recognition at the same time as it sends the message that it's
something "new and better" (i.e. keep the good brand recognition and
try to shed the bad one).


Much +1 here.

Keep in mind, who is the audience of the branding? Us 
(developers/contributors?) or
consumers (that aren't developers or early adopters)? I assert the real audience
is consumers of products that incorporate "the thing".

How do we communicate the unity of developers/contributors to a production
distro without losing the value of the "mother project"?

From a very high level, this is another Linux distro evolution. How do we
communicate that?

Cheers,
Dana
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Florian Fainelli]

On 12/21/2016 07:30 PM, Val Kulkov wrote:
> 
> On 21 December 2016 at 17:01, Florian Fainelli  > wrote:
> 
> On 12/21/2016 01:46 PM, Alberto Bursi wrote:
> > On 12/21/2016 09:42 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang  > wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:
> >>>
>  From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term
> OpenWrt as
>  part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
>  cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and
>  positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand
> attached
>  to the development moving forward.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I agree, I think this is an obvious choice to make. OpenWRT has
> a lot of
> >>> name recognition, it would be foolish to throw that away.
> >>
> >> Just to take the other side for rhetorical purposes, a purpose of a
> >> re-branding exercise is to show a change in the "product" or
> >> organisation behind it. OpenWrt is widely known... as a bleeding
> edge,
> >> sometimes unstable, somewhat hard to use 3rd party firmware. DD-Wrt
> >> and Tomato get a lot more press for some reason. So do things like
> >> Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals,
> coherently,
> >> preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make
> >> sense.
> >>
> >
> > +1 for this. OpenWRT brand isn't 100% positive recognition, it has
> some
> > downsides too. Many people (I know and/or have seen around the
> internet)
> > were discouraged from contributing or using it due to the
> weaknesses of
> > OpenWRT project.
> >
> > I like more the LEDE branding for this reason. It conveys that it is
> > significantly different, possibly for the better, from OpenWRT
> project.
> >
> > But I don't have enough information to say for sure what is the better
> > brand to keep, so this is just my opinion.
> 
> Keeping or not the OpenWrt, or LEDE name is obviously part of the things
> that need to be agreed upon before proceeding with a merger. If not
> about the "brand", "recognition" or other more subjective criteria,
> OpenWrt is a trademark, so that needs to be factored in for the
> decision, in particular if there is any legal activity going on.
> 
> 
> A trademark exists to protect its owner's rights. The "OpenWRT"
> trademark is owned by SPI:
> http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc=4805:r3y94m.2.1
> 
> If there is no unauthorised use of a trademark, there is no legal issue.
> In other words, if the merged project continues as "LEDE", there is no
> legal issue in respect of the "OpenWRT" trademark.
> 
> SPI also has the right to oppose registration or use of a trademark that
> appears confusingly similar to "OpenWRT". This seems to be a purely
> hypothetical situation, but here it is: if OpenWRT and LEDE do not merge
> and for some reason the LEDE folks decide to rename LEDE to FreeWRT or
> alike, SPI may have a legal claim against the use of the "FreeWRT"
> trademark that some people may see as confusingly similar to OpenWRT.
> 
> My main objection to "LEDE" is that I have no idea how to pronounce this
> name correctly. I suspect that many English speakers will find
> themselves equally confused about how to pronounce "LEDE". Is it like in
> "LEAD the way", or like in "LEAD, a heavy metal", or like "LE DE"? While
> the core LEDE community might know how to pronounce the name correctly,
> try explaining it to the world outside. For this reason, "OpenWRT" is a
> better choice imho.
> 
> However, I also agree with Dave, Alberto and Stefan that a name change
> may be a really smart way to communicate the fresh start of the project,
> a reboot, especially if the new name rides on the popularity of
> "OpenWRT". It could be for example "OpenLD" (LD for Linux Device) or
> "LibreWRT". Of course this is all conditional on the merge of OpenWRT
> and LEDE. If the projects do not merge, the OpenWRT folks and SPI may
> have a claim against the use of OpenLD or LibreWRT or alike.
> 
> By the way, there is a pending application at the USPTO for the
> registration of "LEDE" trademark for use in some software or websites:
> http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc=4805:8zgvq2.8.1

The point was that OpenWrt is already registered and managed by SPI, so
we may as well keep using it, and that is just what I meant to say here,
nothing more.
-- 
Florian
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Val Kulkov]

On 21 December 2016 at 17:01, Florian Fainelli  wrote:

> On 12/21/2016 01:46 PM, Alberto Bursi wrote:
> > On 12/21/2016 09:42 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang  wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:
> >>>
>  From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
>  part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
>  cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and
>  positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand attached
>  to the development moving forward.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I agree, I think this is an obvious choice to make. OpenWRT has a lot
> of
> >>> name recognition, it would be foolish to throw that away.
> >>
> >> Just to take the other side for rhetorical purposes, a purpose of a
> >> re-branding exercise is to show a change in the "product" or
> >> organisation behind it. OpenWrt is widely known... as a bleeding edge,
> >> sometimes unstable, somewhat hard to use 3rd party firmware. DD-Wrt
> >> and Tomato get a lot more press for some reason. So do things like
> >> Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals, coherently,
> >> preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make
> >> sense.
> >>
> >
> > +1 for this. OpenWRT brand isn't 100% positive recognition, it has some
> > downsides too. Many people (I know and/or have seen around the internet)
> > were discouraged from contributing or using it due to the weaknesses of
> > OpenWRT project.
> >
> > I like more the LEDE branding for this reason. It conveys that it is
> > significantly different, possibly for the better, from OpenWRT project.
> >
> > But I don't have enough information to say for sure what is the better
> > brand to keep, so this is just my opinion.
>
> Keeping or not the OpenWrt, or LEDE name is obviously part of the things
> that need to be agreed upon before proceeding with a merger. If not
> about the "brand", "recognition" or other more subjective criteria,
> OpenWrt is a trademark, so that needs to be factored in for the
> decision, in particular if there is any legal activity going on.
>

A trademark exists to protect its owner's rights. The "OpenWRT" trademark
is owned by SPI:
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc=4805:r3y94m.2.1

If there is no unauthorised use of a trademark, there is no legal issue. In
other words, if the merged project continues as "LEDE", there is no legal
issue in respect of the "OpenWRT" trademark.

SPI also has the right to oppose registration or use of a trademark that
appears confusingly similar to "OpenWRT". This seems to be a purely
hypothetical situation, but here it is: if OpenWRT and LEDE do not merge
and for some reason the LEDE folks decide to rename LEDE to FreeWRT or
alike, SPI may have a legal claim against the use of the "FreeWRT"
trademark that some people may see as confusingly similar to OpenWRT.

My main objection to "LEDE" is that I have no idea how to pronounce this
name correctly. I suspect that many English speakers will find themselves
equally confused about how to pronounce "LEDE". Is it like in "LEAD the
way", or like in "LEAD, a heavy metal", or like "LE DE"? While the core
LEDE community might know how to pronounce the name correctly, try
explaining it to the world outside. For this reason, "OpenWRT" is a better
choice imho.

However, I also agree with Dave, Alberto and Stefan that a name change may
be a really smart way to communicate the fresh start of the project, a
reboot, especially if the new name rides on the popularity of "OpenWRT". It
could be for example "OpenLD" (LD for Linux Device) or "LibreWRT". Of
course this is all conditional on the merge of OpenWRT and LEDE. If the
projects do not merge, the OpenWRT folks and SPI may have a claim against
the use of OpenLD or LibreWRT or alike.

By the way, there is a pending application at the USPTO for the
registration of "LEDE" trademark for use in some software or websites:
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc=4805:8zgvq2.8.1

- Val
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Stefan Monnier]

> Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals, coherently,
> preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make
> sense.

I don't have a clear opinion either way, but I think there are several
points to take into account:
- OpenWRT indeed has a fair bit of positive name recognition, but mostly
  within a fairly small community.
- The OpenWRT name has downsides:
  - "Open" clearly hints at Open Source, whereas I'd personally
appreciate a reference to Free Software.
  - "WRT" is inherited from the venerable wrt54g, whereas the project
has grown past those "wrt" devices.
- While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the
  brand recognition.  I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or
  OpenOffice->LibreOffice.

So maybe it's a good idea to use the (still hypothetical, but hopefully
close) merge to advertise a rename which will both aim to carry-over the
brand recognition at the same time as it sends the message that it's
something "new and better" (i.e. keep the good brand recognition and
try to shed the bad one).


Stefan
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Florian Fainelli]

On 12/21/2016 01:46 PM, Alberto Bursi wrote:
> On 12/21/2016 09:42 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang  wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:
>>>
 From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
 part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
 cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and
 positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand attached
 to the development moving forward.
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree, I think this is an obvious choice to make. OpenWRT has a lot of
>>> name recognition, it would be foolish to throw that away.
>>
>> Just to take the other side for rhetorical purposes, a purpose of a
>> re-branding exercise is to show a change in the "product" or
>> organisation behind it. OpenWrt is widely known... as a bleeding edge,
>> sometimes unstable, somewhat hard to use 3rd party firmware. DD-Wrt
>> and Tomato get a lot more press for some reason. So do things like
>> Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals, coherently,
>> preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make
>> sense.
>>
> 
> +1 for this. OpenWRT brand isn't 100% positive recognition, it has some 
> downsides too. Many people (I know and/or have seen around the internet) 
> were discouraged from contributing or using it due to the weaknesses of 
> OpenWRT project.
> 
> I like more the LEDE branding for this reason. It conveys that it is 
> significantly different, possibly for the better, from OpenWRT project.
> 
> But I don't have enough information to say for sure what is the better 
> brand to keep, so this is just my opinion.

Keeping or not the OpenWrt, or LEDE name is obviously part of the things
that need to be agreed upon before proceeding with a merger. If not
about the "brand", "recognition" or other more subjective criteria,
OpenWrt is a trademark, so that needs to be factored in for the
decision, in particular if there is any legal activity going on.
-- 
Florian
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Dave Taht]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang  wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:
>
>> From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
>> part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
>> cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and
>> positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand attached
>> to the development moving forward.
>
>
> I agree, I think this is an obvious choice to make. OpenWRT has a lot of
> name recognition, it would be foolish to throw that away.

Just to take the other side for rhetorical purposes, a purpose of a
re-branding exercise is to show a change in the "product" or
organisation behind it. OpenWrt is widely known... as a bleeding edge,
sometimes unstable, somewhat hard to use 3rd party firmware. DD-Wrt
and Tomato get a lot more press for some reason. So do things like
Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals, coherently,
preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make
sense.

> David Lang
>
> ___
> openwrt-devel mailing list
> openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel



-- 
Dave Täht
Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
http://blog.cerowrt.org
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[David Lang]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:


From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and
positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand attached
to the development moving forward.


I agree, I think this is an obvious choice to make. OpenWRT has a lot of name 
recognition, it would be foolish to throw that away.


David Lang
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Zoltan HERPAI]

Hi all,

To clarify, the reason for integrating the OpenWrt patches into the LEDE 
tree is that in the future, at an agreed point in time for both parties, 
the OpenWrt trunk would be rebased from the LEDE tree, giving the 
community a "clean" trunk going forward.


(Hopefully at that time, the "two parties" will be one.)

Thanks Hauke for managing these talks and meetings.

Regards,
Zoltan H

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:


We had multiple meetings to find a solution to solve the problems
between the OpenWrt and the LEDE project and to discuss a possible
merge. Everyone with commit access to LEDE and all OpenWrt core
developers were invited to these meetings. We had productive and
friendly discussions about the problems and our goals.

To be more open and to involve the wider community in these discussions
we would like to publish the meeting minutes from the meetings.

The first in person meeting took place in Berlin at the OpenWrt Summit
on 13. October 2016, but no one took any minutes so we do not have
anything to publish.
The second meeting was an audio conference on 5. November 2016 and
Florian took minutes which are attached to this mail.
At the third audio conference meeting on 3. December 2016 Jow took
minutes which are also attached to this mail.
The last meeting took place on 19. December 2016.
These minutes are representing the current state of the discussions and
are not PR polished.

We agreed on giving Imre, Zoltan and Luka commit access to the LEDE
repository so they can migrate changes they care about and which are not
in LEDE, from the OpenWrt repository to the LEDE repository. We also
encouraging everyone who sent a patch, which got merged into OpenWrt and
which is not in LEDE to send it also to LEDE for integration.

It is still not decided that both project will finally merge and we
haven't decided on the name to use, which parts of the infrastructure
and many other things. In general we are agreeing on many parts and I am
looking forward to a good merged ending for all of us.


___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Fernando Frediani]

Great achievement. Congratulations to all involved.

On the naming topic have in mind the weight OpenWRT has given its history
in all these years. I personally think this point is the easiest.

Given the agreements continue hopefully there will be a single one great
project again soon with all benefits LEDE has brought in terms of
flexibility, agility and transparency to all contributors.

Thanks
Fernando Frediani

On 21 December 2016 at 16:06, Hauke Mehrtens  wrote:

> We had multiple meetings to find a solution to solve the problems
> between the OpenWrt and the LEDE project and to discuss a possible
> merge. Everyone with commit access to LEDE and all OpenWrt core
> developers were invited to these meetings. We had productive and
> friendly discussions about the problems and our goals.
>
> To be more open and to involve the wider community in these discussions
> we would like to publish the meeting minutes from the meetings.
>
> The first in person meeting took place in Berlin at the OpenWrt Summit
> on 13. October 2016, but no one took any minutes so we do not have
> anything to publish.
> The second meeting was an audio conference on 5. November 2016 and
> Florian took minutes which are attached to this mail.
> At the third audio conference meeting on 3. December 2016 Jow took
> minutes which are also attached to this mail.
> The last meeting took place on 19. December 2016.
> These minutes are representing the current state of the discussions and
> are not PR polished.
>
> We agreed on giving Imre, Zoltan and Luka commit access to the LEDE
> repository so they can migrate changes they care about and which are not
> in LEDE, from the OpenWrt repository to the LEDE repository. We also
> encouraging everyone who sent a patch, which got merged into OpenWrt and
> which is not in LEDE to send it also to LEDE for integration.
>
> It is still not decided that both project will finally merge and we
> haven't decided on the name to use, which parts of the infrastructure
> and many other things. In general we are agreeing on many parts and I am
> looking forward to a good merged ending for all of us.
>
> ___
> openwrt-devel mailing list
> openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
>
>
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Kathy Giori]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Hauke Mehrtens  wrote:
> We had multiple meetings to find a solution to solve the problems
> between the OpenWrt and the LEDE project and to discuss a possible
> merge. Everyone with commit access to LEDE and all OpenWrt core
> developers were invited to these meetings. We had productive and
> friendly discussions about the problems and our goals.

Thanks for the update Hauke and those who took notes. A merger would
be a nice Christmas present, or at least something to look forward to
in the New Year! ;)

> It is still not decided that both project will finally merge and we
> haven't decided on the name to use, which parts of the infrastructure
> and many other things. In general we are agreeing on many parts and I am
> looking forward to a good merged ending for all of us.

From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and
positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand attached
to the development moving forward.

happy holidays all!
kg
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

[OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[Hauke Mehrtens]

We had multiple meetings to find a solution to solve the problems
between the OpenWrt and the LEDE project and to discuss a possible
merge. Everyone with commit access to LEDE and all OpenWrt core
developers were invited to these meetings. We had productive and
friendly discussions about the problems and our goals.

To be more open and to involve the wider community in these discussions
we would like to publish the meeting minutes from the meetings.

The first in person meeting took place in Berlin at the OpenWrt Summit
on 13. October 2016, but no one took any minutes so we do not have
anything to publish.
The second meeting was an audio conference on 5. November 2016 and
Florian took minutes which are attached to this mail.
At the third audio conference meeting on 3. December 2016 Jow took
minutes which are also attached to this mail.
The last meeting took place on 19. December 2016.
These minutes are representing the current state of the discussions and
are not PR polished.

We agreed on giving Imre, Zoltan and Luka commit access to the LEDE
repository so they can migrate changes they care about and which are not
in LEDE, from the OpenWrt repository to the LEDE repository. We also
encouraging everyone who sent a patch, which got merged into OpenWrt and
which is not in LEDE to send it also to LEDE for integration.

It is still not decided that both project will finally merge and we
haven't decided on the name to use, which parts of the infrastructure
and many other things. In general we are agreeing on many parts and I am
looking forward to a good merged ending for all of us.
[please fill in missing stuff]

1) Initiate vorting on granting voting rights to wiki people -> Mail will be 
sent tomorrow
2) Ethical guidelines on the usage of project mail addresses based on Debian
 - who?
 - when?
3) Agreed LEDE work flow:
- Patches through mailing lists
- Patches through pull requests
- Changes aggregated, shaped up in developers own staging tree(s)
- Criticial fixes may go directly into the tree (typo, brick-fixes etc.)
4) Current OpenWrt work flow:
- Patchwork is lingering atm
- Main source are Github PRs
- Defer decision on whose infra to use until later
5) LEDE ticket/bug tracking explained
- bugs.lede-project.org
- github issues disabled
- no formalized process for ticket timeout
- atm. manual closing after like 4 weeks
- formalized/automatic process can be established if needed
6) Summarized LEDE infrastructure
- 3 Hetzner servers (2x EX40, 1x EX51), about 150 Euro/Month
- Digital Ocean Hosting Credits $3000 / Year, currentling running four 
small instances
for forum, wiki, git and utility stuff
- Domain about 20 Euro/Year
- Infra paid by Felix (1x EX40), by John (1x EX40), by Jo (1x EX51, Domain)
7) Summarized OpenWrt infrastructure
- drone.io - backed by one server operated by Luka (?)
- [discussion about insufficient resources for full coverage]
- Zoltan hosts: buildbot, wiki on virtual servers at a private company 
(would take 80-100EUR/month if it would be from the market)
- Imre operates server sponsored by Lantiq: 640GB disks? Monthly hosting 
costs TBD with Imre
- [discussion on build CI capabilities, pro/cons of buildbot]
- release manual is needed for lede
8) on releases
- releases need to be automated
- release procedure manual needs to be written
- volunteers needed for backporting
9) on naming / domain
- LEDE is willing to hand over the domain to 3rd party
- using OpenWrt.org would require it to be handed over to an independant 
party like SPI
- lede-project.org as well
- John, Jo are willing to donate money for covering domain expenses during 
the next years
- PROPOSAL:
- Domain holder (SPI, SLFC etc.) shall only react to domain change 
request publically 
  communicated on the projects mailing lists
- John suggested to have name server maintenance at domain holder as 
well
- Imre wants to stay with SPI
10) on server access
- distribute root access to 4+ people
- avoid trust issues by avoiding "secrets" on the servers like personal 
mail boxes
- [John and Jo explained current server admin model]
11) summarizing LEDE position
- grant repository push access to openwrt developers
- grant sserver root access to openwrt developers
- merge outstanding openwrt changes to lede tree
- use common codebase for openwrt and lede
- John explains that there is no real role distinction, there should be a 
rough consent
  among *still active* contributors
- Thrive for broad agreement, resolve issues through voting
12) summarizing openwrt position
- stance regarding repository usage changed since last meeting, lede shall 
notify the 
  community about that as well
- project name ("flag to sail under") should be sorted out before deciding 
on repository
  situation
- Felix