|Name (alphabetic order)||Company||Role|
|Gunnar Andersson||Volvo Car Corporation||Lead Architect|
|Jeremiah Foster||Pelagicore||Community Manager|
|Stephen Lawrence||Renesas||BIT Member|
|Gianpaolo Macario||Mentor Graphics||EG-SI Architect|
|Philippe Robin||Technoveo||PMO Lead|
|Frederic Bourcier||Wind River||BIT Lead|
|Marco Residori||Mentor Graphics||EG-LBS Architect|
As not everybody interested in this group will attend the AMM,
we will start the BoF work with a conference call.
The call will be 2014-10-01, 10:00-11:30 CEST (as announced via genivi-dev email).
Later in 2014 (after the AMM), we could go for a F2F meeting.
If you want to attend, please ensure that your name is on the list below!
|Name||Available on 2014-09-30, 13:30-15:00 CEST?||Actual date: 2014-10-01, 10:00-11:30 CEST|
|Gunnar Andersson||Unfortunately no, attending a funeral.||Yes, with hard stop at 11.30|
|Stephen Lawrence||yes||yes, but hard stop @ 11:30 for BIT meeting|
Proposal for the agenda of the initial call:
See below, direct editing.
This section is a draft - collected from the communication on genivi-dev. To be clarified during the initial meetings of the BoF.
The clustering in the sections below is also an early attempt to classify the topics into manageable chunks.
Remark Stephen Lawrence, 2014-09-03:
Alignment with the GDP SDK is a good goal I think, although it may be a while yet
before we get good feedback on its utility. I'm thinking about the next steps for
the dev side of our platform so I'll be interested to hear where this project is
going and what problems it wants to solve.
Remark Gunnar Andersson, 2014-08-21:
Agree - it was an outcome from SAT F2F to interview companies and thus gather
more information. IIRC Aki got an action to clarify what the current best
practice and needs are from BMW. Of course, your preferred working
environment can simply be explained here on the mailing list as part of the discussion.
Remark Jeremiah Foster, 2014-09-08: I wanted to add some clarification to the three points above and add some additional information. I feel this is required based on new information from Bosch and their eCORE platform since their work overlaps some of GENIVI's work. Specifically, Bosch uses a Debian base and apparently incorporates GENIVI software into eCORE. While exact details need to be clarified it would seem that Bosch and GENIVI could each save each other work by collaborating at least on the packaging of GENIVI software. If GENIVI's software is already packaged by Bosch, perhaps we can use that in a Debian based Vagrant install that includes Franca and other development tools. Both Gunnar and Gianpaolo have done some work in this direction with Vagrant and Franca leaving the remaining work to packaging GENIVI software for Debian. As stated earlier, I'm happy to help in this regard, but only if the work is going to be reused.
We'll need to define the maintainership policy since we don't want to create unmaintained projects, but so far both Gianpaolo and Gunnar seem to maintain their projects and they develop against widely used GENIVI development environments so there is some promise there. We'd need to define how Bosch would contribute or how they would accept contribution if in fact eCORE packages are of interest to GENIVI. Obviously some of that work needs to be clarified by the SAT as well as EG Tools.
In short, there seems the resources to merge these three topics into an easy, cross-platform developer environment with tooling. This is close to an SDK and it seems quite possible the addition of Crosswalk / GNOME / Qt packages could turn it into a complete SDK.
I intend to create a document proposing an updated Common Development Environment based on Debian, eCORE, Vagrant, and EG Tools packages which I'll submit for review to SAT / EG Tools.
Remark Manfred Bathelt, 2014-05-14:
In my opinion GENIVI should aim to some standards for any tools that are related to GENIVI.
For example Eclipse as an IDE for tool integration makes life much easier for users, as they don´t have to maintain many several environments and all tools could use each other.
For current Franca/CommonAPI/yamaica stuff these advantages get quite visible:
Remark Manfred Bathelt, 2014-09-08:
It could be very beneficial to use EG-Tools to further describe aspects of tool-integration, or some kind of tooling environment to simplify contributions of smaller tools.
Tools Team Charter is currently under review.
This Team is interfacing or will interface with several already existing activities in GENIVI
|Define Mission Statement||Define a Mission Statement for the Team,|
|Define Workplan||Define a Workplan for the Team,|
|Lists||Access information||Additional Information|
The usage of a dedicated mailing list is to be decided.
see also: GENIVI Mailing Lists