A group of kernel developers has been working for some time to try to help OSDL improve its interactions with the development and vendor communities. The result was a set of proposals presented to the OSDL board. Greg Kroah-Hartman has now published a summary of the proposals and noted that the OSDL board has agreed to implement the full set. "There is no Linux technical conference in the US anymore. If this could be addressed with a conference much like ALS used to be, it would be a very good thing. We need to nurture the technical community across the US with regional conferences that are easy to access in order to help seed the creation of new developers for Linux."

to post comments

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Jan 27, 2006 20:41 UTC (Fri) by einstein (subscriber, #2052) [Link] (6 responses)

This is a great idea, I really look forward to seeing the implementation worked out in practice - particularly the idea of an a department within OSDL acting as a trusted entity to deal with corporations, sign NDAs as neccessary to get access to hardware and specs, and generally make it easier for vendors to support linux.

It's clear that something had to be done, and Greg K-H's writeup sounds like the most reasonable and logical first steps one could think of.

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Jan 27, 2006 21:39 UTC (Fri) by ca9mbu (guest, #11098) [Link] (5 responses)

I don't quite understand how OSDL signing an NDA would work. NDA's, by definition, mean you're not allowed to disclose the information they contain. By using the spec to implement an open source kernel driver, surely that developer is then disclosing (at least some of) the information contained in the spec, no? Caveat: I'm not a kernel/driver developer, nor have I ever seen an NDA or any documents released under one!

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Jan 27, 2006 22:17 UTC (Fri) by gregkh (subscriber, #8) [Link] (3 responses)

The NDA that would be signed would specifically allow the production
of code that is released under the GPL.

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Jan 28, 2006 3:00 UTC (Sat) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link] (1 responses)

In other words, NVidia, for example, would not be interested. Basically this would be interesting to companies that don't want to give their actual specs away publicly, and are not interested in writing their own drivers for Linux, to get a bit more market share without giving too much away in a form that would make it too easy for their competitors to exploit, and without to heavy an expenditure on their part. Is that the idea?

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Jan 28, 2006 3:30 UTC (Sat) by gregkh (subscriber, #8) [Link]

That is exactly correct.

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Jan 28, 2006 10:29 UTC (Sat) by ca9mbu (guest, #11098) [Link]

Thanks very much for the cluebat, Greg!

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Feb 2, 2006 19:59 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link]

Often, the information in a GPL device driver isn't really that much more than the information you could get by reverse engineering using a bus analyzer, a closed device driver, and a program written to exercise the functionality. The driver discloses a series of interactions that cause the hardware to do a particular known set of things, but not necessarily why you know it will work or how you might make it do something different. And, of course, the comments will tend to reference the spec, so someone who's signed the NDA can tell why the code is right (or if it's wrong), but someone without the spec doesn't get much out of it. Of course, people who don't have the spec could try to reconstruct it be modifying the driver slightly in various ways and seeing what happens, but that's prohibitively time-consuming compared to having a document that states the correct generalizations. So a number of companies offer NDAs that allow writing free drivers based on the specs, and the new thing is just that OSDL can act as an intermediary on the agreements, rather than individual developers having to contact manufacturers.

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Jan 27, 2006 22:47 UTC (Fri) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link]

Penguicon in Michigan (www.penguicon.org) is a combination Linux expo and
science fiction convention that was started in the aftermath of ALS
implosion, in an attempt to recapture some of that spirit. Our technical
tracks aren't as strong as the ALS ones were, but we're doing our best and
would welcome any additional presenters who are interested.

Here are a few convention reports from last year:

http://pc3.penguicon.org/media/2005/

Technical Writer

Posted Jan 28, 2006 23:54 UTC (Sat) by erwbgy (subscriber, #4104) [Link] (3 responses)

We really need a technical writer dedicated to help keeping the in-kernel documentation up to date and relevant.

Indeed. I wonder if we could get OSDL to pay for more of Mr Corbet's time to work on this, since he does a lot of it already.

For instance:

http://lwn.net/Articles/2.6-kernel-api/

and

http://lwn.net/Kernel/Index/

Technical Writer

Posted Jan 30, 2006 9:09 UTC (Mon) by alonso (guest, #2828) [Link]

I strongly agree!

A journalist is NOT a technical writer

Posted Feb 2, 2006 8:48 UTC (Thu) by guybar (guest, #798) [Link] (1 responses)

Indeed. I wonder if we could get OSDL to pay for more of Mr Corbet's time to work on this, since he does a lot of it already.

While I'm sure this proposal is good-intentioned, and even though I'm confident of both the OSDL's and LWN's staffs decency and good faith, a situtation wherein the subject of the articles has the journalist on the pay is NOT a good idea.

It will actually make LWN's job harder, IMHO.

A journalist can be a technical writer

Posted Feb 2, 2006 15:37 UTC (Thu) by The_Flatlander (guest, #19245) [Link]

Ummmm... you should search for your [humble] editor's name on, say, Amazon.com, I believe you'll find that along with two other folks he's written the standard text on Linux Device Drivers. I've read it, and I would not rate it as great journalism, but it is a *fine* bit of technical documentation. (It's well written, approachable, logically laid out; it is arguably perfect.)

I suppose your point is that he could not say, for example, if he was in their employ, that the Directors of OSDL are a bunch of numb-skulls, and you could well be right. On the other hand, I bet he could and would never-the-less find ways to be honest with us.

The Flatlander

Embedded Linux Conference in San Jose

Posted Feb 1, 2006 0:24 UTC (Wed) by tbird20d (subscriber, #1901) [Link] (1 responses)

Well, it may not be a general Linux technical conference, but the CE Linux Forum is hosting an embedded linux conference (ELC) in April in San Jose. See http://www.celinux.org/ELC2006/index.html for details.

Embedded Linux Conference in San Jose

Posted Feb 1, 2006 0:27 UTC (Wed) by tbird20d (subscriber, #1901) [Link]

Oops - that's http://www.celinux.org/elc2006/index.html

OSDL and the kernel community

Posted Feb 2, 2006 18:42 UTC (Thu) by luben (guest, #32484) [Link]

I quote here:

It was created by 17 of the top Linux kernel developers, and has their implicit backing. If anyone wants more details, please just let me know Proposals for how OSDL can help serve the vendor community

[0]Create a program that can be used to get hardware specifications that are only available under a NDA to individual developers. This will entail creating a legal entity under OSDL that can sign the NDA with the company, and provide the individual developer that needs the spec with it. Also, if the developer moves on to do something else, OSDL will still have access to the spec if another developer wants access to it.

Provide some way for developers to access hardware before it is publicly available. This will [1]help the company by allowing kernel developers to help out with drivers and code before it is released to the general public, which will help them with their deadlines of releasing working drivers at the same time hardware is available.

A lot of time, when a vendor tries to get code accepted into the Linux kernel, it is a very frustrating task for both sides. Large code changes are sometimes just dismissed as they do not take into [2]consideration the way the kernel is developed (small changes over time), or they just do not follow the basic rules (coding style, submission process, etc.) We need an approach that will make it easier for everyone involved, and one proposal to do this is to have a training conference. [3]Kernel developers and subsystem maintainers will be willing to provide training on what the proper procedures are, and case studies of what has failed in the past, and why. It will also allow [4]vendor developers to meet directly with the kernel developers to help ease any tension that might occur over email, and will provide a neutral ground for everyone involved.

I've some questions, regarding the highlighed and numbered of the above quotation from your proposal:
[0]: How does OSDL decide which developer is to have access to the spec (which OSDL has signed an NDA for it)? What is the formal procedure? Will there be a public vote or will OSDL pick a "developer" from a hat or will OSDL conduct a formal interview? How will this be governed?

Since after all, the results of such maintenance will have to satisfy the whatever (public) community would be left.

[1]: Will this "help" be compensatable? Since you mention that "deadlines" will be involved?
If such a "help" would be compensatible, then how does Tom, Dick and Harriet get into the OSDL recommended developer club, since from [0] OSDL has singed an NDA for the specs and such specs are given by OSDL to a developer of their (OSDL's) choosing (from [0]).

[2]: Will such rules be evolving? Will they be publicly announced to the community? Would it be possible for Joe Schmoe to adhere to those rules without going through one of your training sessions (from [3])?

[3]: How much will such a training cost? Will I have to travel to Portland to take this training, or will you open franchises world-wide? Can I take this training on-line? Will I be able to take this training alongside RHCE and MSCE training sessions?

[4]: You say "vendor developers meet directly with kernel developers" -- I thought that "vendor developers" were the "kernel developers". I didn't know that there were a distinction between the two. I thought that "kernel developers" were in fact holding jobs at vendors, and contributing to the kernel wasn't their full time job, but was merely a by-product of their professional job.

From [0], and [1] I thought that there would no longer be any need for "vendor developers", since this has now been annexed by "company gets in touch with OSDL, OSDL signs NDA and appoints a developer, which ensures the code will be accepted into the Linux kernel".

I have a dream...

"OSDL, Inc."

This is nothing but a history lesson. Now, who watches the History channel?

Greg, I thought the point of Open Source Development is the opposite of what you've suggested to the OSDL Board of Directors above. I thought that the point of Open Source Development is to happen everywhere, by anyone, by any means. I didn't know that soon enough this task would be reserved to the "17 of the top Linux kernel developers".

Is it worth to note the reason why Linux is where it is right now? Is it necessary to change how Linux has been developing up until now?

US conferences

Posted Feb 3, 2006 9:20 UTC (Fri) by hingo (guest, #14792) [Link] (1 responses)

Without RTA, I always thought there is a good reason why there are no technical conferences in the US anymore. After all, it may be the only country where programmers go to jail for doing what they do, or talking about it at conferences. Isn't this the real reason why "US" Linux conferences are now in Ottawa and off the cost of Florida?

US conferences

Posted Feb 10, 2006 2:31 UTC (Fri) by bignose (subscriber, #40) [Link]

> I always thought there is a good reason why there are no technical
> conferences in the US anymore. After all, it may be the only country where
> programmers go to jail for doing what they do, or talking about it at
> conferences.

Strongly agreed. The USA is one of the more hostile countries in the world for those who actively share information. No increase in the quantity or quality of technical conferences will convince me to visit the USA until its citizens improve the political, legal and social climate there for free software developers.