bzr loves Ubuntu @ UDS

[Jelmer Vernooij]

Hi Vincent,

Thanks for writing this up.

On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 16:49 -0600, Vincent Ladeuil wrote: 
> Many discussions and sessions related to the daily builds and the source
> packages have happened here already.
> 
> It's a bit hard to report about them without repeating a lot of things
> that has been covered during our bzr sprint, so I'll try to focus on the
> main differences (at least in my understanding, feel free to correct
> me).
> 
> 1) code imports
> 
> First of all, I'll appreciate some rehash of the arguments about why
> code imports should be at priority #2 behind mini-grumpy.
> 
> There seem to be many problems around branches with different histories
> between the upstream, debian and ubuntu branches. The sooner we get the
> first ones via code imports the less problems of history rewriting we'll
> have to deal with. Is there something wrong with that reasoning ?
> 
> It has been mentioned in one of the sessions that there are ~100
> packages that are more important than the others but we still don't know
> if we import them correctly.
> 
> Establishing which of these 100 are not imported today sounds like a
> good first step.
> 
> Working from there and making the most important ones work first also
> sound like a task for which we can allocate resources on demand and be
> ready to handle the coming growing demand (5000 new imports are
> expected shortly).
+1, it seems a lot easier to get the history right in the first place
than to fix it up later on.

> 3) package variety
> 
> While discussing with Steve Langasek, he showed me the samba package:
> - upstream: git, not yet imported,
it is, actually:
https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/samba/trunk

Cheers,

Jelmer