Liaison to Launchpad
Henrik Nilsen Omma
henrik at canonical.com
Tue Aug 5 21:46:17 UTC 2008
Hi Jordan,
I think we are approaching this from slightly different angles. I will
try to address your concerns below:
Jordan Mantha wrote:
> Your proposal does nothing to address the growing concerns
> from many Ubuntu community members that Launchpad is developed in a
> way that is blind to or ignores the needs of Ubuntu developers and
> contributors. It only further perpetuates the view that Launchpad only
> listens to Canonical insiders.
I find it difficult to grok how you translate a suggestion to open the
QA-LP phone call to community participation into something that
"perpetuates the view that Launchpad only listens to Canonical insiders".
You quite clearly state your position here though: "We are trying to
build a system where the Ubuntu community is able to discuss and
advocate for their Launchpad needs ..."
That may be your goal, and I agree it's worthwhile, but for the moment
my goal is simply to help improve the quality of Ubuntu through the
shared efforts of community and Canonical. I find that's best achieved
through daily collaboration on technical issues and open communication.
The call participation is a simple way to do that, which I think will
give positive results in a short time. The setting up of an Ubuntu LP
Liaison triumvirate may also have similar benefits but seems to me to be
part of a larger and longer term organisational project, and is IMO
overly formal - but that's just my personal style, not necessarily the
view of Canonical QA.
Again, the Liaison group may be a worthy goal but I'm not sure everyone
on the QA community shares your appetite for making QA a testing ground
for that movement. Our community has generally worked quite well without
overly formal procedures.
Granted, 'sitting in' is a poor term because it implies a passive role.
Whoever joins the call can participate equally with everyone else - make
suggestions, ask for updates on features, etc. But ultimately the
Launchpad team (who have to do the work) will decide which changes to
prioritise - Canonical QA doesn't get to set their agenda either.
I was on a call with Kiko and Reinhard last week about the LP feature
list - Reinhard and I were there on an equal footing as representing
users of Launchpad, with Kiko representing it's developers. It was
positive and productive - we talked about technical issues and got stuff
done. I think community participation in LP calls could work in much the
same way.
So, I'm not suggesting that the community should simply participate in a
'confirmational way' but in the same capacity as the other people on the
call. This is one communication channel that LP already uses to find out
about the needs of Ubuntu QA and I am inviting the community to
participate in that. I don't see why that should get a poor reception.
You also say: "LP people like it", by which it think you are referring
to a conversation with Joey Stanford. Given a future organised group of
Ubuntu members, who have charted the LP-related needs of Ubuntu and can
represent us on those, he is of course happy to meet with that group.
However, the LP bugs team who ultimately has to work on these issues
tell me that they would prefer to simply extend the existing lines of
communication. I'm sorry hat you see my suggestion as obstructive - I am
actually just trying to enhance communications along a channel that
already works.
I'm also inviting a member of the LP bugs team to start sitting in (!)
on our Wednesday QA team IRC meetings as well. Combined with the call
participation we will have full transparency and participation for all
parties in the existing communication channels without designing new
structures or committees. Let's see how that works.
Henrik
More information about the Ubuntu-qa
mailing list