New software created for Ubuntu

[Raphael Hertzog]

Hi,

On Mon, 03 May 2010, David Paleino wrote:
> > With software and themes developed for Ubuntu we would still want to reveal
> >  it in Ubuntu first =) otherwise we are "loosing" our competitive edge over
> >  Debian.
> 
> I don't think people choose Ubuntu because software appears there first ;-)

In particular not when we speak of development releases. And mind you,
Ubuntu usually release their stable release before Debian so you really
have no reason to fear anything from Debian regarding this parameter.

(And BTW, I really don't understand why people are not happier when their
work is largely distributed instead of distributed only in some
distributions)

> >    Ubuntu        Debian
> > 1  NNN           NNN-1
> > 2  NNN-0ubuntu1  NNN-1
> > 3  NNN-1+ubuntu1 NNN-1~debian1
> > 3  NNN           NNNdebian1
> > 
> > Generally during development we want to keep our version number higher then
> > debian and avoid having these packages popping up in Merge-o-Matic. Also
> >  during development cycle these packages will have frequent uploads and
> >  probably considered experimental by debian quality standards. So which
> >  version numbering scheme shall we use?

Choose the upstream version number that you want, and add -1 when you
upload it to Debian. Then sync it to Ubuntu. There's nothing more
complicated. You can use experimental in Debian if you don't want all sid
users to try out your developement releases.

If you really have to release in Ubuntu only, use NNN-0ubuntu1 and so on.

This is the standard Ubuntu policy for any upstream software.

> IMO, to give a "+ubuntuN", there should be a good reason, i.e. different 
> behaviours which can be done at build-time (dpkg-vendor?) should be 
> implemented in one single package.

Ack.

> > 2) watch file pointing to orig.tar.* archive.ubuntu.com to play nice with
> >  PTS

No, it should point to some upstream place (it can be launchpad).

> > 4) translations export
> > 
> > These type of projects are generally translated by Ubuntu Translation Group
> >  and uploaded into the archive independently of the tarballs via langpacks.
> >  I don't believe launchpad can drop ubuntu translations onto upstream
> >  project branches yet. So when creating a release for debian a tarball
> >  needs to be cut with translation export from Rosetta or translations
> >  should be packaged as a separate tarball component for debian with
> >  dpkg-vendor magic.

Here I agree with Chow Loong Jin, as upstream you should provide the
good translations in your original tarball. Grab them from Rosetta
if you want, but include them in the tarball you provide.

> > 5) Branding
> > 
> > Images, icons, desktop files, documentations and references to distro name.
> > 
> > All images either replaced at build time or use XDG icon/theme spec and
> > substitute vendor name in desktop files/documentation/ui at build time?
> > 
> > Or keep it neutral? Cause with these packages Ubuntu building strong brand
> > identity and we would want to keep it like that.

The brand is all about cohesion and not about each package implementing
custom branded images. So rely on the themes and stock icons to provide the proper
branding.

Very few software need to be explicitly branded as linked to a specific
distribution. Those that do should simply accept at configure time an
option specifying the brand name to use (and this can be easily retrieved
with "dpkg-vendor --query vendor").

> > Also what about debian users who want Ubuntu branding and vice versa?
> > dpkg-reconfigure magic? We also have Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Studio etc.... Do
> >  they need branded Software Centers or Usb Creators?

I don't think this is desirable and it's probably not easily doable
either. Do those sub-distributions share the same base-files package or
not?

If yes, then you can't easily use dpkg-vendor to differentiate them.

> > Keep bzr-buildpackage branches on launchpad with a debian branch to merge
> >  fixes such that we can build both ubuntu & debian branded packages
> >  painlessly and merge changes easily.

Really if we share the source package between ubuntu and debian, you
should be able to use a single branch as well.

> > 7) Release schedule
> > 
> > On ubuntu 0-day upload to debian 15-day delay queue?

No, given that the natural flow is Debian -> Ubuntu. Upload to Debian and
immediate sync request in Ubuntu.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Like what I do? Sponsor me: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/05/5-years-of-freexian/
My Debian goals: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/09/debian-related-goals-for-2010/