Re: Call for Foundation-supported Project Ideas

From: Fernando_Apesteguía <fernando.apesteguia_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 06:37:01 UTC
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 1:02 AM Daniel Ebdrup Jensen
<debdrup@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 10:44:16PM +0100, Fernando Apesteguía wrote:
> >El mié., 24 nov. 2021 22:32, Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org>
> >escribió:
> >
> >> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 06:28:14PM -0500, Shawn Webb wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 06:41:01PM -0400, Joseph Mingrone wrote:
> >> > > Hello FreeBSD community,
> >> > >
> >> > > The Foundation is seeking suggestions for new projects to support.
> >> What
> >> > > gaps in the Project are not being addressed by the broader community?
> >> > >
> >> > > You can read about past Foundation-supported projects at
> >> > > https://freebsdfoundation.org/our-work/projects/ and the Foundation's
> >> > > four main areas of focus in the 'Technology Roadmap' article at
> >> > > https://freebsdfoundation.org/blog/technology-roadmap/.
> >> > >
> >> > > Right now we are gathering ideas.  We will send out a call for project
> >> > > grant proposals soon.  If you prefer to send your project ideas
> >> directly
> >> > > to the Foundation, we will be monitoring responses at
> >> > > techteam@freebsdfoundation.org.
> >> >
> >> > Hey Joseph,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for sending this out!
> >> >
> >> > Here's just a few things I'd love to see:
> >> >
> >> > 1. wireless mesh support. this would go _a long_ ways for supporting
> >> >    human rights efforts.
> >> > 2. 100% llvm toolchain for base and ports. freebsd seems to already be
> >> >    going in this direction.
> >> > 3. jail orchestration in base. it's great that we have all these
> >> >    disparate jail management ports, but we lack a fully
> >> >    coherent/integreated solution. I'd love to see jail orchestration
> >> >    get the same love as zfs in base.
> >> > 4. tor browser bundle (port from openbsd?)
> >> >
> >> > That's at least what I can think of off the top of my head.
> >>
> >> Another idea:
> >>
> >> 5. Distributed Poudriere. I have a few systems that would benefit from
> >>    such a feature. For example, two ThunderX1 systems. And once I
> >>    resurrect our partially-dead ThunderX2 system, we'll have three
> >>    arm64 appliances in which we can build packages.
> >>
> >
> >Package seeding in poudriere
>
> Hi folks,
>
>       This has been in poudriere since May 2021 according to [1], and is
>       currently usable if you install poudriere-devel.

Thanks for pointing that out. I've been closely following this feature
in GH and the last comments from the "original" proposal is:

"#797 is merged but there are a lot of pitfalls that make this not as
useful as it seems. For example, llvm and all the other big stuff
still builds. #822 will probably be needed to fix that."
Also https://github.com/freebsd/poudriere/issues/822 is still open.

Package seeding is important precisely to avoid building big stuff
(llvm, cmake, qt5*, etc).

How often does poudriere get updated with changes from
poudriere-devel? Or if poudriere-devel is stable enough I could give
it a try anyway.
>
>       Also, can I appeal to everyone's better nature, and ask not to +1
>       if there's nothing else to add. This is a call for proposals, if
>       there's any voting to be done it will surely not be done via
>       mailing lists. :)
>
> Yours hopefully,
> Daniel Ebdrup Jensen