Patch pilot report 2012-10-15
dmitrij.ledkov at ubuntu.com
Tue Oct 16 10:16:26 UTC 2012
On 16 October 2012 09:59, Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On 16.10.2012 10:49, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>> I was doing something different. I was opening r-series task, and
>> won't fixing q-series task for bugs. To me, that seemed more clear
>> what needs to happen.
> I agree that it's more clear. Still I think I'd prefer to just use a tag
> as a general Ubuntu task always means "the development release", so
> there's no need to have separate teams (do we have separate roles?) or
> separate milestones/series tasks - which might be harder to use for
> people who are not in ~ubuntu-bug-control.
If I am parsing my team membership correctly most of sponsors should
be in ~ubuntu-bugcontrol via ~ubuntu-dev.
I don't know if per-package uploaders are in ~ubuntu-dev or not. So
using series should be a problem for sponsors.
But tag should work fine.... if I can spell it right =)
>> While the bugs are somewhat manageable, the branches are slight more difficult.
>> At the r-series opening, the current nickname lp:ubuntu/package will
>> actually be turned into nickname lp:ubuntu/quantal/package of the
>> actual branch name. That also mean that all the "work in progress"
>> branches will suddenly become SRUs. So somehow on day 0 it would be
>> nice to reject & re-propose all merge proposals that: (i) target into
>> lp:ubuntu/quantal/package AND (ii) top of the debian/changelog is
>> targeting quantal. This should roughly prevent re-targeting real SRUs
>> to r-series.
> I agree this is much more of a problem. Still I think it'd be great if
> we could be VERY pragmatic here and just take those merge proposals,
> update the changelog entry ourselves and go upload it and (if necessary,
> have somebody) mark the branch as merged. I wouldn't like us to 1) ask
> new contributors to follow a new process or 2) wait for somebody to
> write a tool for us which reproposes everything.
> In my mind, the more we just do the obvious and make it work for the
> contributor, the better. :-)
>> but.... a generic approach might be:
>> "~ubuntu-next-series-sponsors" which is subscribed to bugs & asked to
>> review branch proposals, with a mass
>> s/ubuntu-next-series-sponsors/ubuntu-sponsors/ are archive opening.
> As I said above, I think I'd prefer to unsubscribe and use a tag, but
> maybe there are disadvantages I didn't think of.
> This is a very useful discussion and I hope it'll help us keep the queue
> more manageable.
> Have a great day,
> Get involved in Ubuntu development! developer.ubuntu.com/packaging
> And follow @ubuntudev on identi.ca/twitter.com/facebook.com/gplus.to
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
More information about the ubuntu-devel