Monthly gem5 Developers' Meeting - March 13th at 4pm (UTC)

[Harshil2107]

The monthly gem5 Developers' Meeting will take place on March 13th at 4pm UTC.

If you would like to add anything to the agenda please create a comment below.

Agenda:

• gem5 governance
• gem5 release procedures

Meeting Links

Microsoft Teams
Join the meeting now
Meeting ID: 259 778 821 124
Passcode: rA7a6fZ3

[powerjg]

Slides attached.
gem5 governance 2025-03-13.pptx

[Harshil2107]

AI generated Notes from the Developers meeting

Meeting notes:
Governance Model Overview: Jason and Bobby discussed the current governance model, which is meritocratic, meaning that those who contribute more get a vote. They emphasized that the model allows those willing to do the work to make decisions. Jason provided a brief history of the governance model and its philosophy points.
Meritocratic Model: Jason explained that the current governance model is meritocratic, where those who contribute more get a vote. This model allows those willing to do the work to make decisions.
Governance History: Jason provided a brief history of the governance model, stating that it was put into place between 2015 and 2017. The model was chosen because it closely resembled the existing practices at the time.
Philosophy Points: Jason highlighted the philosophy points of the governance model, which include furthering the state-of-the-art in computer architecture, balancing the needs of academic researchers, industry researchers, and students, and creating a welcoming, open, and transparent environment.
Governance Model Issues: Jason highlighted some issues with the current governance model, such as difficulty finding people to take on work and the tendency to conserve the status quo instead of progressing. He expressed frustration with the lack of participation from the community.
Finding Contributors: Jason mentioned the difficulty in finding people to take on work, especially tasks that are not directly related to pushing their own research ideas, such as managing infrastructure and reviewing patches.
Conserving Status Quo: Jason expressed frustration with the tendency to conserve the status quo instead of progressing. He noted that people often find it easier to say no to changes rather than taking on the work to improve things or proposing better solutions.
Lack of Participation: Jason highlighted the lack of participation from the community in decision-making processes, which makes it challenging to gauge consensus and move forward with improvements.
Release Procedures: Giacomo raised concerns about the release procedures and whether maintainers should be able to make releases without consulting others. Bobby and Jason discussed the importance of having a more structured process for releases and agreed to update the release procedure to include discussions at developer meetings.
Concerns Raised: Giacomo raised concerns about whether maintainers should be able to make releases without consulting others, questioning if this aligns with the meritocratic model.
Structured Process: Bobby and Jason discussed the importance of having a more structured process for releases. They agreed that releases should be discussed at developer meetings to ensure transparency and community involvement.
Updating Procedures: Jason agreed to update the release procedure to include discussions at developer meetings, ensuring that the community is informed and can provide input on upcoming releases.
Maintainers and PMC Roles: Jason and Bobby discussed the roles of maintainers and the PMC, noting that the PMC currently has no active role. They agreed that the maintainers should have more involvement in decision-making processes, such as releases, and suggested updating the governance model to reflect this.
Current Roles: Jason and Bobby noted that the PMC currently has no active role, and the maintainers' primary role is to click the merge button on GitHub.
Increased Involvement: They agreed that maintainers should have more involvement in decision-making processes, such as releases, to ensure that the community's input is considered.
Updating Governance: They suggested updating the governance model to reflect the increased involvement of maintainers in decision-making processes, moving away from the outdated references to the review board and Garrett.
Community Participation: Jason and Bobby expressed concerns about the lack of participation from the community in decision-making processes. They emphasized the importance of having more input from the community and suggested ways to encourage more involvement.
Lack of Participation: Jason and Bobby expressed concerns about the lack of participation from the community in decision-making processes, making it difficult to gauge consensus and move forward with improvements.
Encouraging Involvement: They emphasized the importance of having more input from the community and suggested ways to encourage more involvement, such as discussing important topics at developer meetings and updating procedures to ensure transparency.
Maintainer Cleanup: Jason proposed cleaning up the list of maintainers by removing those who haven’t contributed in the past year. He suggested sending out a poll for self-nominations to become a maintainer and received no objections from the participants.
Proposal: Jason proposed cleaning up the list of maintainers by removing those who haven’t contributed in the past year, including making any posts on any gemfib forums, commits, or attending meetings.
Self-Nominations: He suggested sending out a poll for self-nominations to become a maintainer, ensuring that active contributors are recognized and involved in decision-making processes.
Gen 5 Workshop: Jason announced the upcoming Gen 5 Workshop at ISCA and encouraged participants to submit their work and inform others at their institutions to do the same. The deadline for submissions is May 1st.
Workshop Announcement: Jason announced the upcoming Gen 5 Workshop at ISCA and encouraged participants to submit their work and inform others at their institutions to do the same.
Submission Deadline: The deadline for submissions is May 1st, providing participants with a month and a half to prepare and submit their work.
Follow-up tasks:
Release Procedure Update: Create a pull request to update the release procedure to include discussing releases at developer meetings. (Jason)
Release Process Proposal: Submit a pull request with a proposal to simplify the release process, as discussed with Richard. (Giacomo, Richard)
Maintainer Self-Nomination: Send out a poll for self-nominations to become a maintainer. (Jason)
Maintainer Cleanup: Clean the list of maintainers by removing those who haven't contributed in the past year. (Jason)