<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font face="Ubuntu">Hi folks<br>
<br>
Manik asked me to clarify my comments on priorities in the push to
release Ubuntu Core 16, the all-snap version of Ubuntu 16.04 LTS.<br>
<br>
This is the "GA" of snappy LTS, so it's a critical step for us.
I'm absolutely convinced that snaps are an important new primitive
for operations of Ubuntu-based devices of all sorts, and very
focused on helping our users have a great experience with them.
All the feedback we've had on snaps has validated the focus on
transactional updates, rollbacks, and dependency bundling, which
is excellent.<br>
<br>
What we are debating, and my opinion is part of that debate, is
what the minimal requirements are for us to have a good GA. We are
going as fast as we can while maintaining quality, the question is
just whether we take a little longer to have a more complete GA,
or whether we put the all-snap Ubuntu Core 16 GA out pretty much
immediately, at the risk of having a more significant upgrade
issue during the life of Ubuntu Core 16.<br>
<br>
What we know for sure is that Ubuntu Core will get meaningful
updates over the coming months, in behaviour as well as the
standard security and reliability fixes. That's because we have a
lot of demand for capabilities in the snap daemon for policy that
isn't there yet, but which we have mapped out pretty clearly, and
which we will add to snappy with updates to Ubuntu Core. For
example, enabling better branding of webdm for gadget
manufacturers, better support for control of updates by
manufacturers, better support for open source projects that want
any developer to publish their own snaps of their code, and so on.
All of these are good things we will get in the next couple of
months, through updates to Ubuntu Core, and I would very much like
to ensure that those updates are smooth and hassle free.<br>
<br>
We know pretty clearly that we need to separate the kernel snap,
os snap, and gadget snap. That's because we know we want to have a
free and maintained kernel that anybody can use, but we also need
gadget manufacturers to be able to modify the behaviour of the
base device. Those modifications go into the gadget snap.<br>
<br>
Gustavo proposed that we publish an image without a gadget snap,
or at least that was my quick reading of his proposal :) My
response was to say I would think we need to at least have a
minimal gadget snap so that we don't have an awkward upgrade.
We're having a sprint in ten days time where I figure we can hash
this out. Anyone with strong insights is welcome to join us in
Vancouver or share on the list. My comments are in the spirit that
a two-to-four week delay in publishing official GA Ubuntu Core 16
images is worth while if it saves us from having a very hard
update in three months time.<br>
<br>
I'm in the middle of the OpenStack summit at the moment so am not
able to participate directly in the debate, but trust the team to
make the call having considered my opinion. I look forward to
hearing all about that call in Vancouver :)<br>
<br>
If it isn't yet completely clear, I think snappy is the most
exciting thing in Ubuntu right now, and that it will make a huge
difference to everyday usage by developers and device
manufacturers, but also people who just need to get apps to their
VMs in the cloud. Engaging with the developer community is our top
priority - we have an amazing community in Ubuntu, they are very
thoughtful and creative and like to find bugs and send fixes. My
sense is that we can grow the community of people who care about
snaps fastest by engaging people who are interested in building
snaps for classic systems (mainly because that's what they and
their friends have today). All of </font><font face="Ubuntu"><font
face="Ubuntu">those community insights help build a better
snappy, and a better ecosystem of parts for snaps, and a more
fun community. And that helps us make Ubuntu Core 16 a huge
success for everybody.<br>
<br>
When Ubuntu Core 16 ships, it will have *exactly* the same
libraries and binaries and kernel as Ubuntu 16.04 LTS does right
now. So encouraging people to build snaps on classic Ubuntu
16.04 LTS feeds our snap momentum for Ubuntu Core directly.<br>
<br>
I hope this note is reassuring to those who had concerns - I'm
not suggesting a substantial delay, only that we consider
thoughtfully the benefits of a slightly more general
minimal-viable GA, and if that costs us a few weeks now, but
saves us from a tricky update later, then we can use the time to
grow developer participation in snaps on classic. My comments
are in the spirit of helping us figure out the best plan for a
huge Ubuntu Core 16, not a diminishing of commitment to the
all-snap world. Far from it, I seem to have spent all week
answer very excited questions about Ubuntu Core snaps on
top-of-rack switches for large scale OpenStack deployments :)<br>
</font><br>
Mark<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>