PPU application - Gunnar Hjalmarsson

[Micah Gersten]

On 02/10/2014 03:42 AM, Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
> On 2014-02-10 07:21, Micah Gersten wrote:
>>>> I'm glad to see someone take an interest in ubuntu-docs!  Unfortunately,
>>>> as there are already 2 other applications on Feb 10 and it's very short
>>>> notice, I don't think we'll be able to process the application until the
>>>> Feb 24 meeting.
>>>
>>> I understand. I can be available during the meeting, for the case the
>>> time would still suffice, well aware of the risk that it'll have to wait
>>> a fortnight. Would that be meaningful at all?
>>
>> We generally request a week's notice so that the application can be
>> reviewed in advance.  Also, I notice that you don't have any
>> endorsements from sponsors for this package, which is generally a
>> prerequisite for PPU.  I would suggest taking the two weeks and getting
>> at least one sponsored upload of ubuntu-docs (I didn't see one on the
>> sponsorship miner [1]) and an endorsement from at least one sponsor of
>> said package.
> 
> I guess I'd better mention that the work flow with respect to
> ubuntu-docs differs from 'normal' packages in the archive. There are
> typically only two uploads per cycle: One at DocumentationStringFreeze
> in order to pass the PO files to the translators, and one close to
> FinalRelease when the translators are done. In the meantime everything
> happens in the project branch lp:ubuntu-docs, to which I have commit
> right. That explains why the one comment on the application is from
> another member of ~ubuntu-core-doc who sponsored a number of my merge
> proposals before I could commit myself.
> 
> A few times in the past, there have been some confusion and
> misunderstandings at release time, which for instance gave the
> translators far too short time to do their part. Right now we are
> improving the documentation of the ubuntu-docs release process in order
> to minimize the risk for repeating past mistakes:
> 
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DocumentationTeam/ReleaseSchedule
> 
> To do what you suggest, we would need to make an extra upload for the
> sole purpose of supporting this application. I guess it's doable, but I
> would still like to ask if that's really what you think should be done.
> 
> Waiting until the 24th is not a problem, of course.

Let us discuss this a bit internally and we'll get back to you.  I don't
think a special upload to fulfill any perceived need is the way to go here.

Thanks for your patience,
Micah