The maintainers meeting is a meeting for the developer team to coordinate on pressing issues and to plan the development of the PX4 Autopilot project, the community is welcome to join and listen, but won’t be able to speak unless specific access is granted ahead of time.
Meeting Link
Agenda
Finalize maintainer role description
Identify maintainer opportunities
Timeframe/approach for Gazebo on macOS - maybe VM?
Open mic for maintainers
Code style decision
@hamishwillee sorry I dropped this forever. Let’s just decide once and for all in this call what we’re doing here and lock it in. (maybe try to see when we can plan the linting update as well)
Rover architecture
Need to sync on short term vs long term output mapping strategy when we have vehicle types that don’t adhere to the force/torque inputs control allocation takes.
Bounty system for PX4
What do you all think of adopting a bounty system in PX4 Repository?
Essentially, we would have either Dronecode or private organizations (any companies using PX4) create a bounty to resolve a bug / create a new feature, and community members would try to claim it by submitting PRs, and once verified, would get the payout .
I think this could be cool way to incentivize active contributions & enable companies of PX4 Ecosystem to support the project organically
My questions are:
Can dronecode support this system? (Initial budget of maybe around $1000 to try it out?)
Can we publicize this so that PX4 community companies can provide bounties to develop features?
Excellent - good to have that code thing clear. @rroche I also added discussion of PX4 development on macOS toolchain.
IMO this is a precondition to dropping jMAVSim support as that is the only SIM that works everywhere
Gus suggests that we might use VM for this. That is toolchain he uses with parallels
FWIW I prefer native setups and parallels is not free. But if it works then we should document it as an option
The setup should be scripted and in the PX4 tree, ideally the same as for the other setups so that they can be run in CI, maintained, and edited as needed.
We should make sure that companies cant create bounties that is just for their use case & doesnt align with general roadmap of px4
We should make sure that bounties dont end up with quick and dirty patch PRs only
Giving organic way for companies using px4 to contribute back by creating bounties is a good thing that wasnt possible before
As long as bounty bot doesnt interfere with main development flow, its worth giving a try
20% commision fee is very high. Perhaps we can negotiate to a lower fee for higher volume bounty operation
About flight testing dashboard idea: We would most likely have small specific flight testers contributing most flights, so maybe this will eventually not be needed, but could be worth it to have all required tests shown in single dashboard conveniently
We need to have good tests to catch when these sorts of festures are broken
Perhaps something that doesnt depend on gazebo (as it comes with a lot of extra things), since it has dependency & takes a lot of computation. Can we have something quick & detrrministic, like SIH maybe?
At least from what I can recall we didnt discuss it. But now reading back on it I think since it was a single bullet item, it may have been looked over by mistake
Would be cool to have the bounty a pot as well (if possible at all) so the people could also create a worthwhile bounty instead of just companies - 100 people chipping in $5-$20+ each could make something worth a devs time
November 07, 2023
Meeting Link
Agenda
.
Meeting Notes