UDD @ Portland

[James Westby]

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:33:27 +1100, Martin Pool <mbp at canonical.com> wrote:
> I'd like to let looms progress, but not (unless james or others feel
> differently) add them into the dependency chain for getting UDD going.

No, we don't have to add it to the chain to get it going, but I think
it's one ingredient of having a great system.

>  iow people should be able to try them on particular branches, without
> mandating them for all package branches, and (perhaps?) without
> requiring everyone working on that package to use them.

I think a gradual migration path is something to aim for. What we want
is consistency of interaction. I don't want to have to work out what is
going on in the packaging branch before I can start work on it. Allowing
"branch; hack; build; push" regardless of what's going on and allowing
others to delve more deeply is one way, another would be to have "bzr
add-patch" or something that prepared the tree for working, I'm sure
there are more.

Thanks,

James