Bug 0 review pls
kirkland at canonical.com
Mon Jun 2 22:26:05 UTC 2008
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Dan Shearer <dan at shearer.org> wrote:
> I have put some text for Bug 0 up at
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/Bug0#preview . I didn't get into the
> solutions we worked on at UDS, thinking this is what bug report followup
> comments are for and the body was already too long.
Here's some candid feedback on your wiki page...
First of all, I'm afraid some people might take offense at calling
this initiative "Bug #0", thinking that it precedes or supercedes Bug
#1. Bug #1 has really been Ubuntu's rallying point for nearly 4 years
now, with the thread gathering some ~700 comments in that time. I'm
not sure how people will take suddenly putting Ubuntu Server "ahead"
of Ubuntu Desktop.
That said, I recognize what I think is your key point... That in Bug
#1, Mark very clearly states: "Microsoft has a majority market share
in the new desktop PC marketplace. This is a bug, which Ubuntu is
designed to fix." This statement quite overtly omits the "server PC
marketplace". If and/or when he decides to target the server
marketplace in full force, perhaps an update by Mark to that bug
report is in order.
In the mean time, I think constructing this as a Blueprint in
Launchpad (http://blueprints.launchpad.net) would be a more
appropriate approach. You can link it to Bug #1 as the motivation,
and track the progress there. Every Blueprint points to a
Specification in the wiki (template at
http://wiki.ubuntu.com/SpecSpec). Your current Bug0 page is the seed
for the specification. That's where you'd define a summary,
rationale, use cases, design, and implementation details for how we
would go about taking market share by making Ubuntu's server
technology superior in the market.
And actually, I think you have several distinct ideas in the Bug0
page... You could really create a Blueprint/Spec for each of those.
Each is a unique problem that could and perhaps should be solved in a
future Ubuntu release. These are the individual sorts of work items
we try to gather at UDS and coherently present in Blueprints/Specs
(eg, Active Directory Integration, Outlook-compatible replacement,
Large Filesystem Replication). And we did discuss a number of those.
In any case, I think you have some excellent ideas in there! I'm just
not quite sure that creating a single, super-bugreport is going to be
the most effective method to actually solving the problem. However, I
think we do have some excellent tools within the Ubuntu/Launchpad
infrastructure for defining precise technical shortcomings, designing
appropriate solutions, and tracking them into Ubuntu releases.
More information about the ubuntu-server