Bug 0 review pls
kirkland at canonical.com
Tue Jun 3 04:48:02 UTC 2008
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Dan Shearer <dan at shearer.org> wrote:
> I was trying to catch people's attention mostly, wanting to focus on
> what the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy would define as an SEP Field -
> Someone Else's Problem and therefore invisible to everyone. From the
> feedback I got back at the time this much worked. Now to finesse it.
+1 for the HHGTTG reference ;-)
> My justification for that is that Linux was a success on the server
> before it was anywhere on the client, and the failure to compete on the
> server is an embarassment first and a challenge second.
Linux, perhaps. Ubuntu, not so. Bug #1 is about Ubuntu.
> As it happens there's a new set of opportunties and we aren't limited to
> just aping wherever Microsoft has gone... but refusing to acknowledge
> clear failings does not bode well for the bold new wave.
True--tons of new opportunities. Personally, I'm more interested in
new frontiers than replacing Microsoft infrastructure as such Active
Directory and Exchange servers. I think it would be great if Ubuntu
were the default choice for Web 2.0 servers, such as wiki's, gobby's,
pastebin's, streaming media, etc.
> As to numbers... I think even if this is Bug #7346492, if people take
> the content seriously it's going to be turning up in the mainstream
> press and maybe even in Microsoft PR.
2^2,079,460,347 perhaps? ... Strangely, this is also the telephone
number of an Islington flat where Arthur Dent went to a fancy dress
party, and met a very nice young woman whom he totally blew it with.
> [chopped advice on going through the lp process. I'll study it and
> probably just follow it as given. So far I have worked out that
> Blueprint == MRD in enterprise speak.]
Right, "Blueprints" are equivalent to "Line Items" in IBM-speak. It's
a loose suggestion of work that could be done. Note that the
"Drafter", "Assignee", and "Approver" can all be different people.
You can write a blueprint, approved by someone, and implemented by a
third person (or team). Perhaps someone from Canonical will work on
the item, or perhaps you or someone else in the community will run
> I get the feeling that if people just create content in launchpad it
> gets ignored unless there was buyin in the first place... is that fair?
True. It sounds like the UDS->Blueprint->Spec process has been
changed recently. Based on the sessions, discussions, and lessons
learned at UDS Prague, we're rapidly writing Blueprints and Specs for
the functionality we'd like to see make it into Intrepid.
See the Intrepid schedule, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IntrepidReleaseSchedule
Specification (Blueprints) are due by June 5th (that's Thursday). The
powers that be will go through the submitted Blueprints and explicitly
bless some of them for Intrepid.
> Can you point me to anything online about these discussions, or should I
> start blueprinting?
> I'll need some help working through the process. Thanks for your advice.
If I understand the process correctly, Blueprinting (and the
corresponding Specs) should represent the results of discussions and
sessions at UDS. At least that's the intention. I'd say you can
start Blueprinting anything we discussed at UDS and you felt like you
got some support behind. Understand that not ever Blueprint can be
"approved" for the current release. Keep in touch with people in
#ubuntu-server and #ubuntu-devel to make sure you're on the right
track and not spinning your wheels.
More information about the ubuntu-server