Future of the Packaging Guide

Emmet Hikory emmet.hikory at gmail.com
Sun Sep 30 01:06:58 BST 2007

On 9/30/07, Reinhard Tartler <siretart at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> "Matthew East" <mdke at ubuntu.com> writes:
> > On 19/09/2007, Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >>       * malicious editing, harder to have QA for it
> >
> > You can use access control on the wiki too if desired.
> Access control would imply a workflow like:
>  * Only a restricted group (like developers) may edit
>  * contributors need to download the file as raw, edit it and send a
>  * patch via email
>  * Editors comment on the patch and eventually apply it.
> Is this really easier than using a bzr branch?

    Only in that the restricted group need not be familiar with bzr.
It is also not significantly easier than just updating the
packaging-guide package in SVN.  Given the current level of malicious
editing on the current wiki, and that we trust that as a repository
for ubuntu process information, I suspect this risk is minor.

    More importantly, the need for somebody to take over updating the
current package / repository was first raised 6th June (1), since
which every commit has been by Jordan (r4142, r4143, r4148).  Would
changing the membership of the restricted team really change the
activity level?

> >>       * what happens to the packaging-guide package?
> >
> > I'd say that it can disappear for the time being.
> Which would be sad.
> > Since internet access is pretty much essential to contributing as an
> > Ubuntu developer, it's ok to have this documentation online only.
> I usually have a good and fast internet connection, but still appreciate
> having documentation locally on my laptop installed.

    I'd like to second the desire for an offline solution.  In a
number of cases, developer internet access may be limited during
packaging times (intermittent connection, travel, metered connection,
MAC restrictions, etc.), yet available for upload.  Having offline
access to the guide means that guidelines can be referenced during
these times.  If a moin export is not available, perhaps something
could be adjusted to make `wget --spider
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/` allow this?

> >>       * licensing
> >
> > This is readily workaroundable by adding some licence text to the
> > bottom of each wiki page.
> Is it really desireable to have more than one license in use in
> wiki.ubuntu.com?

    Having more than one license could be quite confusing.  Would it
not be better to review with contributors (or the docteam) as part of
the migration process?

(1) http://laserjock.wordpress.com/2007/07/06/35/


More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list