Request For Candidates: Application Review Board

[Scott Kitterman]

On Monday, August 09, 2010 04:57:20 pm Elliot Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu at kitterman.com> 
wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 05, 2010 08:42:58 pm Jono Bacon wrote:
> >> As such, if you are an
> >> application developer and want to get your app in the software center,
> >> the process is probably too complex and involved.
> > 
> > In what way is this new process simpler and less involved?
> 
> Not trying to answer for Jono, but I think that snippet of the
> description doesn't hit the real benefit of the new process (as I see
> it). I don't think the submission process or the review process is
> necessarily less labor here than it would be for going through REVU. I
> think the key difference is one of timing.
> 
> As an application developer, when I want to ship a LOLCats app or
> custom healthcare app for endocrinologists who speak Tagalog on
> iPhone, Android, Windows, or OS X, I ship that app on top of a stable
> and already released operating system. With Ubuntu/Debian, if I want
> the app to show up in software center I need to ship the app as part
> of the operating system itself, subject to the same rigorous process
> that is essential for developing a stable base platform, because the
> current process doesn't distinguish between the rules for updating
> libc and the rules for shipping a LOLCats app.
> 
> To me, the key benefit of this new process is providing a way for app
> developers to ship applications on top of stable, released versions of
> Ubuntu. A key part of the review process will be rejecting things that
> are too invasive/destabilizing (changing the platform rather than
> being plain apps running on top of the platform). I think it will be
> greatly beneficial for application developers to be able to deliver
> new apps on top of Maverick a full year after it has shipped.

We routinely (and in a light weight way) do this via backports already.

Scott K