Meeting Minutes

johannes-esr · 2025-02-26T09:03:10Z

johannes-esr
Feb 26, 2025
Collaborator

johannes-esr · 2025-02-26T09:05:19Z

johannes-esr
Feb 26, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-09-14

Participants

@antonkri
@FScholPer
@opajonk
@marcolan
@PhilippM-qorix

Agenda

Lessons Learned Release V0.9
PR Decision Record for name collision in include paths & file names #3234 (https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/pr-3196/design_decisions/DR-003-arch.html) needs feedback
Feedback AI Rules

Feedback AI Rules (Wait until @antonkri feedback arrived -> open PR)
Lessons Learned Release Process
Proposal: Higher interval of integration and module releases to fail fast
Tracability Report job should contain every artifact of the release validation
Patches should be not usual case -> Analyse reasons(public/private apis, breaking changes workflows)
Release notes should be automated. Should be integrated in the new release workflows -> @FScholPer
Tagging of epics which are relevant for the next release (autotag?!)
Every module should provide a verification report inside reference integration like in https://eclipse-score.github.io/reference_integration/main/verification_report/modules/baselibs/baselibs_verification_report.html
DR-08 DR-008 Option 4: two-stage test-execution workflow (PR 2 of 2) reference_integration#280 -> TL needs deep dive session -> invite @PiotrKorkus
@FScholPer will open pr to demonstrate module_template needs of verification report, tracability report
ML3 should be checked against SBOM.
Alignment Meeting Agenda:
- Code Coverage tooling implementation
- Please link code to requirements and unit -test to requirements and component requirements to feature_features. And please check if you fulfill aous.
- Fill out inspection checklist

0 replies

johannes-esr · 2025-02-28T08:01:33Z

johannes-esr
Feb 28, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-02-28

Participants

@johannes-esr
@markert-r
@vinodreddy-g
@antonkri
@FScholPer

Meeting Minutes

Additional weekly slot: Friday, 1:30 - 2:30pm -> @FScholPer to invite
@markert-r to schedule meeting for March 20 for new interested companies
New agenda points for PL Circle:
- Date of Townhall
- Combination of https://eclipse-score.github.io/ & https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/ to allow next step of Contribution One Pager

0 replies

johannes-esr · 2025-03-06T11:01:42Z

johannes-esr
Mar 6, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-03-06

Participants

@pahmann
@antonkri
@FScholPer
@johannes-esr

Agenda

Breakdown of first to Milestones in Epics

Meeting Minutes

Milestone: Process & Tools Enable Development
Milestone: S-CORE v0.5 Modules Buildable
Tasks for Communities / CFTs:
- All existing issues which are matching to the Epics of the Milestone shall be attached
- Add Milestone to all linked Issues

0 replies

antonkri · 2025-03-06T11:58:51Z

antonkri
Mar 6, 2025
Maintainer

2025-03-07

Participants

@johannes-esr
@antonkri
@vinodreddy-g
@FScholPer

Agenda

Breakdown further Milestones

Meeting Minutes

Milestone: Reference Integration Linux
- Epic: Linux container x86_64 is up and running
  Acceptance criterias: Linux container (x86_64) is prepared, configured properly (ethernet/ssh access) and uploaded to some location, that is accessible from local builds and CI.
- Epic: Linux container arm64 is up and running
  Acceptance criterias: Linux container (arm64) is prepared, configured properly (ethernet/ssh access) and uploaded to some location, that is accessible from local builds and CI.
- Epic: ITF framework is up & running.
  Acceptance criterias: ITF framework is integrated into bazel. ITF test job is set-up in CI and is part of check/gate pipeline. ITF can establish ssh connection to the image. As first test in the CI pipeline, ITF should deploy application under test to the Linux container and ensure, that this one is running.
- Epic: ITF framework dlt support
  Acceptance criterias: ITF framework can receive dlt streams from the applications and provides infrastructure to evaluate DLT logs in runtime and post-mortem.
Milestone: QNX Support
- Epic: Integration of QNX toolchain.
  Acceptance criterias: QNX 8 toolchain is integrated into bazel. Users need to get the license from QNX everywhere program and put it some specific location for being able to use QNX 8 toolchain.
- Epic: Building with QNX in CI.
  Acceptance criterias: CI jobs for building of applications are set-up for all currently existing applications and documentation is provided how set-up QNX CI jobs for future applications. QNX CI license is stored as GitHub Secret and allows unlimited execution of QNX CI jobs in parallel
- Epic: QNX Compiler config.
  Acceptance Criteria: compiler config is agreed with Process team and compiler/linker flags are chosen to support ASIL development right from the beginning.
Milestone: Reference integration QNX
- Epic: Qemu with QNX image and x86 BSP
  Acceptance Criteria: Qemu with QNX image, x86 BSP and S-CORE applications can be built with bazel locally and in CI. There exist a voting CI job, that builds QNX Qemu image and executes all existing ITF tests with it.
- Epic: Qemu with QNX image and Qualcomm (ARM) BSP
  Acceptance Criteria: Qemu with QNX image, Qualcomm BSP and S-CORE applications can be built with bazel locally and on demand on CI.

0 replies

johannes-esr · 2025-03-14T07:58:53Z

johannes-esr
Mar 14, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-03-14

Participants

Agenda

How to do further planning?

Meeting Minutes

Meeting this afternoon to update PMP with information decided on https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/434#discussioncomment-12299310 & https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/434#discussioncomment-12445705
- Breakdown of Workpackages
- Labels to use
- ...

0 replies

johannes-esr · 2025-03-19T08:56:03Z

johannes-esr
Mar 19, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-03-19

Participants

@johannes-esr
@markert-r
@antonkri
@timkl7
@qor-lb

Meeting Minutes

Next week alignment meeting regarding Processes & Tools between AUTOSAR & S-CORE in Lüneburg, https://www.autosar.org/news-events/detail?tx_news_pi1%5Baction%5D=detail&tx_news_pi1%5Bcontroller%5D=News&tx_news_pi1%5Bnews%5D=304&cHash=a20923b48d9e091adb600c148ab6948f
- @AlexanderLanin will attend the meeting
- @antonkri to check if @aschemmel-tech will attend, too
Proposal: TL Meeting on 31th March 2025, 9:00 - 12:30
- Planning/Review of Milestones ending in June 2025, too much in parallel
Tasks for next meeting:
- Review of Milestone planning; some Epics are not assigned to a CFT/Community
Change of Monday Meeting Series:
- 9 - 10am only TL
- 10 - 11am TL & Communities & CFTs
- @qor-lb changed invitation, to check if everybody received the updated invitation

0 replies

johannes-esr · 2025-03-21T13:35:11Z

johannes-esr
Mar 21, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-03-21

Participants

@johannes-esr
@FScholPer
@qor-lb
@antonkri

Agenda

Open points from last discussion

Meeting Minutes

AUTOSAR / S-CORE Meeting: @aschemmel-tech can just attend online
TL Workshop: March 28, starting 12 pm (instead of March 31)
Should Safety Linux be a target platform of S-CORE? -> To be addressed in PL Circle @antonkri
Point for next PL Circle: Analysis AUTOSAR -> @antonkri

0 replies

qor-lb · 2025-03-24T08:37:38Z

qor-lb
Mar 24, 2025
Maintainer

2025-03-24

Participants

Tom Fleischmann
Rebecca Markert
Anton Kiroborodov
Frank Scholter Peres
Lars Bauhofer

Agenda

Current Status S-CORE Logo
Agenda for WS on 28th
Feedback productivity Tech Lead Sync

Meeting Minutes

to 1.

An agenda of SteerCo but not update yet

to 2.
Proposals to be prepared until friday:

More concrete milestone/roadmap planning - @antonkri / @markert-r
- do we have all the dependencies?
- how to get a better overview?
Definition of meeting structure - @markert-r
- who prepares the meeting?
- what agenda is discussed
- How to pass tasks between teams #410,
How to contribute/how are feature requests managed? - @TomFleischmann / @qor-lb
- Feature requests are prepared to reflect technical roadmap
- Case A: FR open but no contributions yet (Feature is on roadmap but not implemented)
- Case B: Feature not yet on roadmap (functionality not yet targeted by by S-CORE)
Management of components within S-CORE (who can review & merge) - @FScholPer

misc:

https://oss-review-toolkit.org/ort/

0 replies

qor-lb · 2025-03-26T09:02:07Z

qor-lb
Mar 26, 2025
Maintainer

2025-03-26

Participants

Tom Fleischmann
Rebecca Markert
Anton Kiroborodov
Lars Bauhofer

Agenda

Slides for townhall
Move invite from zoom to teams

Meeting Minutes

to 1.

Welcome and Introduction - 5 min
Project Vision - 10 min - @markert-r
- Goal S-CORE: source code standardization
Current Status & Overview Cross Functional Teams - 40 min
- Content Tech - 20 min - @qor-lb
  - 0.5 components & how they were selected - i.e. Architecture WS, Selection Criteria, Components
  - Hint to 1.0 definitions in following months
- Content Process & Tools - 20 min - @markert-r
  - Current status process - 5 min
  - Results from ekxida - 15 min
Roadmap (milestones) - 10 min - @FScholPer
How to contribute - 5min - @qor-lb
- (CFT's & work structure)
Q&A - 20 min

to 2.

accepted

misc:

Preliminary slides: 20250320_S-CORE_Townhall_Meeting.pptx
Community days slides:

0 replies

johannes-esr · 2025-03-28T14:31:21Z

johannes-esr
Mar 28, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-03-28

Participants

Meeting Minutes

docs: improved how to contribute section #776
Review of Roadmap Planning
Tasks for Monday Meeting:
- https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/milestone/7 -> Status to be checked with Infrastructure Community
- Status (~2min) of each CFT/Community in Monday Meeting

0 replies

FScholPer · 2025-03-31T07:09:26Z

FScholPer
Mar 31, 2025
Maintainer

2025-03-31

Participants

Agenda

Feedback for planning milestones

Meeting Minutes

We need the participants for the architecture workshop A1 @qor-lb

0 replies

johannes-esr · 2025-04-02T07:45:37Z

johannes-esr
Apr 2, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-04-02

Participants

@johannes-esr
@antonkri
@FScholPer

Agenda

Review of Monday Meeting

Meeting Minutes

Detailed check of tasks of Operational Community on Friday, 1:30 - 2:30pm

0 replies

TomFleischmann · 2025-04-07T08:01:54Z

TomFleischmann
Apr 7, 2025
Collaborator

2025-04-07

Participants

@markert-r
@antonkri
@TomFleischmann
@qor-lb
@FScholPer
@guysagnes

Agenda

Review last weeks cross functional community meeting
Review roadmap for next meeting
Craft agenda for next meeting
Briefly discuss day & topic distribution for arch workshop

Meeting minutes

Review last weeks cross functional community meeting

Some discussions touched on topics in parallel / double was observed
-> could be improved to talk alongside the roadmap / epics board roadmap / epics board and teams then deep dive into their more detailed boards
Invites are not easy to graps / have in every bodies calendar better, potential to improve meeting management for OSS projects (@TomFleischmann to ask EF what other projects successfully do)
Potentially better: One sends out the invite per meeting and create a meeting overview page (When, Who, What, Link, ..)
Maybe not good to the whole world in the project lead meeting - makes it hard to get topics done and not helpfull for new parties who want to contribute and join in

Review roadmap for next meeting

Minor: some items have a wrong end date
Discussed usage of templates including checks (req linking, ..) for repositories
Pro: makes it easier for all subprojects to follow the same process (and adhere and enable later safety certification)
Have a central solution and example for coding, unittest, req links, linting, compiler flags, ... makes sense to avoid "works in my subproject/works on my machine"
Anton: Consensus of central bazel, yet CI config may need to differ (or define at a later point in time) in order to have 1st steps in the projects made easier and learn first
A lot of bazel and CI work in repos currently -> Action: Extra discussion with Arch community to unblock @AlexanderLanin and to describe target picture

Craft agenda for next meeting

Review roadmap and have everybody to give a status update and important dependencies
Raise topic about central repository template to help prioritize (try-out defined process); needs an extra meeting with tooling community & tech leads & some of the feature teams ; @markert-r to make invite for an hour

Briefly discuss day & topic distribution for arch workshop from Tuesday to Thursday

As we better know a 1.0 scope the question around what could be used/based on autosar is time wise good to have on Thursday.

1 reply

FScholPer Apr 9, 2025
Maintainer

2025-04-11

Participants

Agenda

Currently there are many Stakeholder requirements which are outdated and the granularity differs much for example between com & feo.

Meeting minutes

johannes-esr · 2025-04-11T12:30:46Z

johannes-esr
Apr 11, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-04-11

Participants

@johannes-esr
@TomFleischmann
@FScholPer
@markert-r

Meeting Minutes

Review Milestone Planning
- Check with Alexander L. whether this intermediate milestones can be deleted
- What to do with "Blueprint Definition" Milestone? To be checked in next TL circle

0 replies

johannes-esr · 2025-04-14T08:00:22Z

johannes-esr
Apr 14, 2025
Collaborator Author

2025-04-14

Participants

@johannes-esr
@TomFleischmann
@antonkri
@markert-r

Agenda

Review of TL Sync Meeting Slots
Meetings during easter holiday
What to do with "Blueprint Definition" Milestone
Outcome of Architecture Workshop
Agenda TL, CFT, Community Sync
General

Meeting Minutes

- Monday, 9 - 10 am
- Wednesday, 9 - 10 am
- Friday, 8:35 - 9 am
- Friday, 1:30 - 2:30 pm
- @qor-lb to delete invitations in Eclipse calender
- @markert-r to invite for new meetings
- Meetings on 2025-04-18 & 2025-04-21 are cancelled
- Milestone renamed, https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/milestone/15
- @FScholPer to break down into epics
- Scope for S-CORE v1.0 #908
- Epic: Architectural gap analysis S-CORE v0.5 #904
- Deletion of intermedia milestones
- Review of "Modules Buildable" on 2025-04-28

0 replies

FScholPer · 2026-09-21T08:44:32Z

FScholPer
Sep 21, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

anmittag · 2026-09-28T06:54:55Z

anmittag
Sep 28, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

anmittag · 2026-09-30T13:22:44Z

anmittag
Sep 30, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

anmittag · 2026-09-30T15:22:46Z

anmittag
Sep 30, 2026
Maintainer

2026-10-05

Participants

Agenda

Docs As Code - TRLC (ML3) from @anmittag
> There was a clear decision to continue with Docs As Code as our main tool
> COM and CFG are not using Docs As Code at all
> There is a work around on the way to generate useable reports out of TRLC
> invite for a workshop @anmittag and inform the x-core council about the current blocking situation
DR-008 from @anmittag
> actually https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/design_decisions/integration/DR-008-int.html was decided
> DR-008 Option 4: two-stage test-execution workflow (PR 2 of 2) reference_integration#280 e.g. ist pending since long
> @antonkri mentioned alternatives (?): which ones
> Q: How to proceed? => re-evaluate the decision record
> @antonkri starts a "requirements list" for ref-Integration

coding guidlines @anmittag
"maybe not super important or only a problem in persistency 😉 ... but can we "finalize" the coding guidelines for C++ and Rust for functions / methods? The S-CORE docs don’t specify exact casing: the API guideline says to follow language idioms, and the C++ guideline says the coding style is not fully decided. Current repositories differ: baselibs does have a repository-local C++ PascalCase rule, so the clarification should say whether that is intended project-wide, persistency uses snake_case for Rust and C++. Used refs:

[S-CORE API guideline](https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/blob/main/docs/contribute/development/api_guideline.rst)
[S-CORE C++ coding guideline](https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/blob/main/docs/contribute/development/cpp/coding_guidelines.rst)
[Writing Rust Code incl. Coding Guidelines](https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/contribute/development/rust/coding_guidelines.html)
[api_guideline.rst](https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/blob/main/docs/contribute/development/api_guideline.rst)[eclipse-score/score]   (https://github.com/eclipse-score/score)[coding_guidelines.rst](https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/blob/main/docs/contribute/development/cpp/coding_guidelines.rst)[eclipse-score/score](https://github.com/eclipse-score/score)

for rust there is the pr from dan https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/pull/3262 and for c++ we have to define what misra rules https://github.com/github/codeql-coding-standards/tree/main/cpp, clippy rules should be applied https://github.com/eclipse-score/score_cpp_policies     
https://github.com/github/codeql-coding-standards/blob/main/docs/iso_26262_tool_qualification.md

we shall create a common coding guidline @anmittag

not anymore included repos back to incubators? @anmittag
> we use the "quality stage" of a repos instead
FEP Process Change from @qor-lb please review
docs: add incubation path to the FEP guide #3299
PoC NVIDIA SRAC in ref_int feat: add SRAC sidecar proof of concept reference_integration#370 please have a look inside

for next meeting:

1.0

0 replies

antonkri · 2026-10-07T14:14:07Z

antonkri
Oct 7, 2026
Maintainer

2026-10-08

Participants

Agenda

QNX Tarball download / @nradakovic

we are planning to download the QNX stuff into S-CORE to stabilize our infrastructure
but we need the proper information on how it is build at qnx
score-private repos is planned to be used https://github.com/eclipse-score/qnx_sdp_pkg
an open for all score members is not appreciated => rejected
decision: we have to escalate it to x-core council or eclipse:
1st meeting with eclipse-wayne @anmittag with @AlexanderLanin
2nd escalation to x-core
Clarification of QNX Tarball procedure #3326
Reasoning for reference_integration repo
- docs: add DR-009-int on the need for reference_integration #3306 to pre-review from all
S-Core Compatibility Test Suite (CSTS)
- docs: add DR-010 S-CORE Compatibility Test Suite (SCTS) overview #3315 to pre-review from all
Missing label for Component Request
- Component Modification : json parser : remove parser backend selection and the nlohmann parser baselibs#632 tries to implement one as evidence for the next Audit, including Impact Analysis,
  any reason for that?
  => adding a type for Component Requests in the template @anmittag
Collecting items for 2027 Infrastructure Topics Budget
> Brainstorming
> rust certification: https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/3254
> process audits
> ai agents
> agentic coding
> tool qualification
> ask infrastructure team => @AlexanderLanin
> reference hardware
Workshop docs-as-code
- https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/3311 => Wednesday 14th online?
Presentation of verification report
- https://eclipse-score.github.io/reference_integration/main/verification_report/index.html
Review of "Escalation mail"

Blocking issue: compliance with the S-CORE process proposal 

To:  Eclipse X-CORE Council 
From: Eclipse S-CORE Project 
Subject: Qualification risk caused by non-uniform process implementation

Dear members of the Eclipse X-CORE Council, 

The Eclipse S-CORE project has agreed on a process proposal based on a docs-as-code approach for generating and maintaining the project’s engineering documentation and evidence. This covers requirements, architecture, test specifications and results, quality results, and end-to-end traceability. 

A blocking issue has emerged: some S-CORE modules currently do not, or cannot, follow the agreed process proposal consistently. As a result, the project cannot yet guarantee a uniform, reproducible, and auditable evidence chain across all contributed modules. 

This is not only a documentation concern. It creates a material risk for distributors that integrate S-CORE into a commercial offering and must ultimately qualify the resulting distribution. Missing or incompatible evidence increases the effort required to reconstruct traceability, assess quality and completeness, justify deviations, and provide qualification or certification evidence. 

S-CORE is therefore organizing a focused workshop next week with affected contributors and relevant process and infrastructure stakeholders. The objective is to agree on a technically feasible implementation of the process proposal for every module and to resolve legitimate technical constraints without weakening project-wide compliance. 

Requested council support 

Endorse the S-CORE process proposal, including the docs-as-code approach, as mandatory for every S-CORE module. 

Ask member companies to ensure that each S-CORE module within their contribution follows the agreed process proposal, including requirements, architecture, tests, quality results, and traceability in the prescribed integrable form. 

Ensure that sufficiently empowered technical and process representatives participate in the workshop and can commit to corrective actions. 

If no viable implementation solution is reached, require each X-CORE member company to ensure that its contributed S-CORE modules comply with the process proposal and provide a committed remediation plan for any remaining gap. 

Decision principle proposed 

Each S-CORE module must follow the agreed S-CORE process proposal. This includes applying the agreed docs-as-code approach for requirements, architecture, tests, quality results, and traceability. Any necessary implementation adaptation must remain compliant with the process proposal and preserve a version-controlled, reproducible, machine-processable, reviewable, and project-wide traceable evidence chain. 

We ask the council to acknowledge this issue as a cross-company governance and qualification risk, support the workshop as the immediate resolution path, and ensure that all member-company contributions comply with the agreed S-CORE process proposal. 

Sincerely, 

Eclipse S-CORE Project

0 replies

anmittag · 2026-10-12T06:49:28Z

anmittag
Oct 12, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

antonkri · 2026-10-14T14:54:21Z

antonkri
Oct 14, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

antonkri · 2026-10-15T13:32:24Z

antonkri
Oct 15, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

antonkri · 2026-10-22T12:02:15Z

antonkri
Oct 22, 2026
Maintainer

2026-10-22

participants

Guests

Agenda

Persistency

Persistency – Compliance Status

Traceability chain

ISO 26262 mapped → Process complies via links → Persistency realizes via links → Confirmation by FDR and Exida

Step	Evidence
ISO 26262 mapped to the process	–
Process complies via links	✅ 100 % linkage (standards mapping)
Persistency realizes via links	✅ 100 % linkage: 31 of 31 work products realize a process work product and are built from its template
Confirmation by FDR and Exida	Audit #6: 29 clauses OK, 3 actions, 1 open

Each work product conforms to the process and is up to date

The Safety Plan names the template and process status for each work product (module safety plan).
The docs-as-code metamodel checks all mandatory attributes and allowed link types on every PR.
Links are version-pinned ([version==1]), so any change breaks the link in the build.

Conclusion

All processes are applied.
Open tasks are mainly iterations. As the pilot, Persistency went through more iterations than other modules will need.
Security status follows the progress of the process.
Baselibs
- main focus: Result and BitManipulation
- Presentation in Audit mainly based on platform and module verification reports
Communication
- As Communication does follow its own process, we will do Component Qualification for it.
Common topics
- Important for S-Core v1.0: Misra checks with CodeQL
- Currently there are open discussions:
- We need to agree on set of Misra checks that will apply for S-Core v1.0 -> @antonkri
Downloadable images
- First PR: https://github.com/eclipse-autosd/eclipse-autosd
- # Raspberry Pi 5 (aarch64) Image — Implementation Plan reference_integration#403

0 replies

anmittag · 2026-10-23T10:33:41Z

anmittag
Oct 23, 2026
Maintainer

odra Oct 23, 2026
Collaborator

Topic for the agenda: AutoSD Functional Platform Updates

antonkri · 2026-10-29T13:04:32Z

antonkri
Oct 29, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

anmittag · 2026-11-02T07:35:21Z

anmittag
Nov 2, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

antonkri · 2026-11-05T08:06:02Z

antonkri
Nov 5, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

anmittag · 2026-11-06T12:12:19Z

anmittag
Nov 6, 2026
Maintainer

0 replies

anmittag · 2026-11-12T11:45:25Z

anmittag
Nov 12, 2026
Maintainer

masc2023 Nov 12, 2026
Collaborator

open: how can we do a smooth migration in case Community decides to change

@anmittag, according to our process, you need to raise a FEP, type Feature Modification, impact analysis would be a good basis to judge, what is migration cost, or Decision Record attached

Eclipse S-CORE

Meeting Minutes - Tech Lead Sync #516

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

johannes-esr Feb 26, 2025 Collaborator

YYYY-MM-DD

Participants

Monday Agenda

Status

Thursday Agenda

TLC Board Review

Minutes

Replies: 168 comments · 44 replies

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

johannes-esr Feb 26, 2025 Collaborator Author

2025-09-14

Participants

Agenda

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

johannes-esr Feb 28, 2025 Collaborator Author

2025-02-28

Participants

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

johannes-esr Mar 6, 2025 Collaborator Author

2025-03-06

Participants

Agenda

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

antonkri Mar 6, 2025 Maintainer

2025-03-07

Participants

Agenda

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

johannes-esr Mar 14, 2025 Collaborator Author

2025-03-14

Participants

Agenda

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

johannes-esr Mar 19, 2025 Collaborator Author

2025-03-19

Participants

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

johannes-esr Mar 21, 2025 Collaborator Author

2025-03-21

Participants

Agenda

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

qor-lb Mar 24, 2025 Maintainer

2025-03-24

Participants

Agenda

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

qor-lb Mar 26, 2025 Maintainer

2025-03-26

Participants

Agenda

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

johannes-esr Mar 28, 2025 Collaborator Author

2025-03-28

Participants

Meeting Minutes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

FScholPer Mar 31, 2025 Maintainer

2025-03-31

Participants

Agenda

johannes-esr
Feb 26, 2025
Collaborator

Replies: 168 comments 44 replies

johannes-esr
Feb 26, 2025
Collaborator Author

johannes-esr
Feb 28, 2025
Collaborator Author

johannes-esr
Mar 6, 2025
Collaborator Author

antonkri
Mar 6, 2025
Maintainer

johannes-esr
Mar 14, 2025
Collaborator Author

johannes-esr
Mar 19, 2025
Collaborator Author

johannes-esr
Mar 21, 2025
Collaborator Author

qor-lb
Mar 24, 2025
Maintainer

qor-lb
Mar 26, 2025
Maintainer

johannes-esr
Mar 28, 2025
Collaborator Author

FScholPer
Mar 31, 2025
Maintainer

johannes-esr
Apr 2, 2025
Collaborator Author

TomFleischmann
Apr 7, 2025
Collaborator

FScholPer Apr 9, 2025
Maintainer