MOTU Meeting Minutes for 2008-02-01

[Scott Kitterman]

On Monday 04 February 2008 10:35, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Stefan Potyra schrieb:
> > yes, there was a short discussion about it, see [1], 20.05-20.11h.
>
> Relevant part of the log:
>
> geser	but wouldn't people expect from motu-release more than it really is?
> ScottK	For Gutsy, motu-uvf was active helping manage things up through
> release.
> ScottK	No one complained and I think it helped a lot with a good end
> game for Universe.
> ScottK	I'm good with either motu-freeze or motu-release.
> ScottK	FF is the first step in release management for Universe.
> sistpoty	ScottK: so you think that (the team formerly known as) motu-uvf
> should in fact care with release matters?
> ScottK	sistpoty: I do.
> ScottK	sistpoty: We did it for Gutsy and it worked well.
> sistpoty	hm... I guess the goals are quite similar in fact
> sistpoty	(for a release team and handling uvf-requests)
> ScottK	It's really the same kind of risk/benifit tradeoff, just with
> different focus as the release gets closer.
> nixternal	or what was formally called uvf-requests I guess
> sistpoty	so I don't have any objections to motu-release
>
> I don't think there's anything wrong with having a MOTU Release Team,
> here's what I think such a team might deal with:
>
>  - Freeze decisions (UVF, Final Freeze, NEW packages, etc)
>  - Planning of transitions
>  - Liaison with the QA team in regards of getting people involved in
> fixing certain kinds of bugs
>  - Liaise with Release Team (ubuntu-release)
>  - Setting Release 'Goals'
>
> You see what I mean: the agenda spans not only the last eleven weeks of
> the release but much more than that. In addition to approving all kinds
> of requests, there'd be more general planning and talking to others
> involved.

Given that this is motu-release for Hardy, the last 11 weeks is pretty much 
all it CAN cover at this point.  I think this is a good list for Hardy +1 
planning that we ought to pick up (maybe have a motu-release for Hardy +1 
appointed before the next UDS).

> I absolutely believe we can lift this weight in an organised effort.
> Especially with Hardy being an LTS and more people getting involved,
> it'd be important to have somebody in the position of identifying what
> needs fixing and coordinating the whole lot of us. :-)

The discussion at the meeting was mostly about the enhanced role in the 
release endgame that we did in Gutsy and wanting to do that again.  

> If it should be the 5 people in the re-dubbed ~motu-release team, I
> don't know. Let me know what you think.

For what we discussed, I think 5 is fine.  For Hardy +1 if we expand even more 
to earlier in the process then we should discuss it.  I'd say we ought to 
figure out what we're going to do and then decide how many people we need to 
do it.

Scott K