What's Canonical thinking about Bazaar?

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


...
> If you want more outside contributors, then I think there needs to be
> more conversation occurring in a place that's accessible by all.  I
> was really happy a year ago to see a fair amount of discussion on the
> mailing list.  But in the past year, that seems to have declined.  I
> feel more out of the loop on that front, and like I have less
> influence in getting some issue addressed.  I realize you need to talk
> in person, on the phone, etc.  But it would be nice for some of that
> to filter it's way back to the list.  Especially discussions about big
> issues you're seeing, planning milestones, etc.  I don't necessarily
> need to contribute to that conversation (although I would like to!),
> but I'd at least like to see that discussion and understand the
> project's motivations.

Honestly, there is very little conversation that isn't either via the
mailing list or via a sprint. Possibly the sprints are a bit too closed.
But we haven't been doing standups for a few months, so at least *I*
don't talk on the phone with the other developers much.

We did do some of the discussion about what we will be focusing on next
in a private mailing list. Mostly because it was "what is Canonical
asking of its employees". We brought it public fairly quickly. But it is
one of those things where you are mostly responding to an email and not
always noticing the CC list.

> 
> I also liked the fact that discussions around potential merges was
> visible.  I've subscribed to the merge proposals, but I'm not seeing
> much there... and there is stuff landing on trunk (I might just be
> missing something).  From a developer perspective, it helps me to know
> how you want to see contributions to your project.  What are the hot
> button issues with getting something in, and what the process is.
> 

All of the discussions around merge proposals is public. I don't know
why you aren't seeing them. (I have roughly 2000 emails in the 'review'
folder since early 2009. Though that is versus 3000 emails in 'bzr'
since August.)

> I'd also prefer to *not* have strong branding (I want to feel like the
> source is the community's, not Canonical's).  And, to be honest, I
> would like to see more affirmation that Windows is going supported at
> the same level as Linux, given that Canonical is strongly interested
> in another OS being successful. :-)  That's a bit of a separate topic,
> but it does affect the scope of the community you wish to reach.

So honestly, Canonical is not directly supporting the Windows platform
as much as the Linux platform.  I'm the only core dev who runs it
regularly, and we don't yet have a clean test suite yet. Canonical has
certainly hired contractors like Mark Hammond to work on the Windows
side of things. We've also sold support contracts for people running
Bazaar on Windows. So it is certainly supported, even if it isn't the #1
focus.

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkr0UsQACgkQJdeBCYSNAANqpQCfb3n3ACVl3SBIEDgl+QK4pBw6
gEgAoMO14AubkS/zGD1EgbEia8H1oKN0
=9D1F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----