MOTU Application

[Laurent Bigonville]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 21:13:37 +0200
Stefan Potyra <sistpoty at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> [..]
> >
> > I was talking about the differences in the reviewing process between
> > bzr, debdiff and revu. Of course if you do collaborative maintaining
> > you must use a single source.
> 
> sorry, but I didn't get your answer about reviewing (for sponsoring 
> new/existing packages) really, and that's what my initial question was about. 
> So I'd like to ask you again, what part of the process of reviewing packages 
> with bzr you think is superiour compared to REVU or using debdiffs. Maybe you 
> could give a sample what steps you are performing when reviewing a package 
> via bzr highlighting what you think is particularly better for each one, so 
> that I can understand your answer better ;).

A simple use case:

Someone wants to make a contribution to a package maintained in a bzr.
He creates a branch from the trunk, makes his changes and publish his
modified branch.
The maintainer can pull the changes, review and merge them to trunk,
voila. I think it's easier for everyone. The changes can be
reverted and the credits of the patch are kept. Moreover there are
tools like bzr-buildpackage to build full package from a bzr branch. I
talked here of bzr because of its integration in LP, but it could be any
(decentralised) VCS.

> 
> Nonetheless, I believe I've read enough to come to a decision:
> Seeing your answers to the technical questions leaves no doubts about your 
> technical skills for me. Your answers regarding the telepathy team make me 
> feel that the telepathy team should get better integrated into the MOTU 
> landscape. I guess having another MOTU inside the tp. team is a good step 
> forward, so +1 for your application from me.

:)

> 
> Cheers,
>     Stefan.
> 
Laurent