Graphing Zephyr Development and Project Health and How Visualizing Data Help with Gr...
summary
Project-wide dashboards track contributors (GitHub shows ~2,039, LF counts ~6,000), about 200 active contributors per month, and commit distributions with a small core of high-volume committers. Performance uses the Laten measure benchmark on QEMU/chemo; a recent 500 ns regression from a refactor is bisected and fixed, yielding a net gain. Footprint drops after the BYY change and is tracked per-board on public Elasticsearch/Kibana dashboards. Merge policy automation enforces merge criteria (two approvals, four‑eyes) and cuts unapproved merges from ~15% and long review tails (40% → ~10%); tests show ~2,600 suites across ~1,000 platforms.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (8)
- 0:00Zephyr project health tracking
- 3:54Project growth and stability
- 12:21Contributor activity case study
- 12:43Performance with Latenze benchmark
- 19:57Footprint metrics and optimizations
- 24:11Merge criteria and guidelines
- 33:54Future data visualization plans
- 38:52Q&A
related talks
48mGraphing Zephyr Development and Project Health and How Visualizing Data Help with Gro...
43mZephyr Project: Results from Applying Open Source and Security Best Practices
43mZephyr at 10 Years: Survey Feedback
40mContributing to Zephyr vs (Linux and U-boot)
43mCommunity Health Reporting 101
40m9 Years in the Making, the Story of Zephyr, Starting with Commit Nr. 1
36mHow to Get Your Zephyr Patches Merged
11mKeynote: Consider IoT Projects in FLOSS Foundations: A Report Based on Community Data