UDD @ Portland
barry at canonical.com
Thu Feb 11 16:08:23 GMT 2010
On Feb 11, 2010, at 02:57 AM, James Westby wrote:
>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.
I agree. Looms help both the developer and reviewer focus in on the parts
that they really care about, and I think could help manage mostly boring
bookkeeping details (such has how to play nicely in whichever patch system is
Looms probably aren't essential for udd, but seem very important for really
fantastic (and fun!) opportunistic hacking.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-distributed-devel/attachments/20100211/82df4a65/attachment.pgp
More information about the ubuntu-distributed-devel