New Process Review: Post App Release Process

[Martin Pitt]

Hello Jono,

Jono Bacon [2010-07-15 13:03 -0700]:
> On 14 July 2010 03:12, Martin Pitt <martin.pitt at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >  * I don't quite understand the purpose of the "The process only
> >   applies to a specific version of an application" limitation. Does
> >   that mean that the process has to be re-done for each version bump?
> >   If software-center merely gets a link to the PPA, or a package name
> >   in a PPA, then the developer can just upload newer versions?
> 
> the original thinking is that the process only applies new versions of
> software that are not already packaged in the archives. So Lernid 2.0
> would not be accepted (as their is a Lernid in the archive), but
> MyFooApp 1.0 would be eligible to use the process.

Ah, so could it just say what it means with "The process only applies
to applications which are not already packaged in Ubuntu."?

> >  * "Includes family-friendly end-user content": If interpreted
> >   strictly, this might also rule out quite a lot of games. Do we
> >   really want that?
> 
> I added this in the interests of completeness, but this could open up
> a can of worms about what we consider "family friendly". Do you think
> we should remove this?

Right about the potential can of worms, but I think we should reserve
the right of refusing an application if the board has some good
reasons for this, such as being against public policy, excessively
violent or sexually explicit, and so on. If we are going to advertise
this new software under an Ubuntu umbrella (which it is because it's
going to be the Ubuntu Software Center), then we should uphold the
spirit of Ubuntu here as well IMHO. I'm not sure about a good wording
here, though. "The application conforms to the Ubuntu spirit and Code
of Conduct."?

> Thanks, Martin. Do you consider the process as it stands now something
> you are comfortable to provide a +1 on?

I would like to see the "specific version" question settled first,
since this is a fundamental property of the process (check it once vs.
check every upload). I think the latter would introduce way too much
effort and redundancy, and would be much more rigorous than for Ubuntu
itself (where we just check the initial upload). If the process
intends to do a rigorous check only the first time, and for updates
maybe just a cursory one (quick look at the changelog, perhaps), and
the wording is updated accordingly, then I'm happy with it.

Thanks, Jono!

Martin
-- 
Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)