Re: [ubuntu/oneiric-updates] software-properties 0.81.11 (Accepted)

[Martin Pitt]

Michael Vogt [2011-10-12  4:28 -]:
> software-properties (0.81.11) oneiric-updates; urgency=low
> 
>   * lp:~kelemeng/software-properties/bug853231-upstream:
> - Add missing files to POTFILES.in (LP: #853231)
> Many thanks to Gabor Kelemen

Argh, this upload was targetted at oneiric-updates. I noticed only after I
accepted it, so I immediately removed it again from the archive.

Sorry for the confusion.

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt| http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Re: Getting new packages into Ubuntu

[Matthew Paul Thomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Stefano Rivera wrote on 10/10/11 20:24:
> 
> Hi Sebastien (2011.10.10_20:34:48_+0200) ...
>>> * No obvious approaches to handling security issues or bug 
>>> reports yet.
>> 
>> How does android or app stores deal with those?


As well as linking to the developer's Web site, which Ubuntu Software
Center already does, they sometimes have another link specifically for
reporting problems. We'd like to add that too.


> ... When you download something from the software centre, the 
> origin isn't obvious. Currently, I think about the only obvious 
> feedback mechanism is the reviews in Software Center (are those 
> visible on the web anywhere?). By doing this, we are also aligning 
> Ubuntu with these apps, to some degree. People find the quality of 
> the apps in smartphones application stores to be a discriminator 
> between smartphone platforms. I think that'll easily carry over to 
> Ubuntu, and people will measure Ubuntu by the quality of the app 
> store.
> 
> We don't want as little responsibility as possible. We want to 
> create the best experience for our users and ourselves.


That isn't a one-dimensional landscape, though. More oversight also
means more time and effort to publish an application, which means
fewer applications, which means a worse experience. (Or,
alternatively, a good experience for fewer people.)

The past 18 years of Debian and Ubuntu have shown that the model of
"we package all your stuff, and people upgrade their OS to get it" is
not a peak on that landscape. Or at least, not one high enough to be
competitive.

>> We shouldn't aim at getting libraries in extras, the libraries 
>> should be part of the platform an in the archive itself then.
> 
> I'm talking about bundled libraries, not library packages.
> There'll be ARB apps that need libraries that aren't in Ubuntu.
> (And probably ARB apps that want different library versions to what
> we ship in Ubuntu).
> 
> ...


Ubuntu developers announce, months in advance, what kernel and
toolchain versions will be used in the next release. Minimizing the
library problem may involve doing something similar for libraries (or
at least library API versions). So if you want your application
published for that Ubuntu version, you can write to that version's APIs.

- -- 
mpt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk6UlZ4ACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecpCagCgmTGk1ZgIvSqBLUQkVLerPYLl
zUkAn1YQ2vltlKQyTu8cchWPGr19pMgs
=3mXM
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Re: Unseeded Universe Final Freeze

[Iain Lane]

Hi there,

On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 10:12:42PM -0500, Kate Stewart wrote:
> Dear Developers,
>   
>There has been some ambiguity around when the unseeded universe will
> have its final freeze and expectations around it, so clarifying this has
> been the subject of some recent discussion amongst the release team.
> For those interested in getting those last important fixes to unseeded
> universe packages included in the archive for 11.10,  unseeded universe
> final freeze will be on Oct. 11 at 1200 UTC.  Submissions well before
> this date are recommended though. 

This has now passed, so the whole archive is in hard freeze now for the
release. Thanks to everyone who contributed to Oneiric!

For fun, I ran some stats using UDD. This was the 7th most active development
cycle by uploads to the release pocket.

distribution | uploads | rank 
-+-+--
 breezy  |   12834 |1
 karmic  |   11950 |2
 dapper  |   11791 |3
 natty   |   11780 |4
 hardy   |   11459 |5
 lucid   |   11246 |6
 oneiric |   10889 |7
 gutsy   |9949 |8
 jaunty  |9722 |9
 intrepid|9397 |   10
 maverick|8879 |   11
 feisty  |8522 |   12
 edgy|7953 |   13
 hoary   |4552 |   14
 warty   |1617 |   15

413 different people uploaded packages to the archive (using
Changed-By).

The source package uploaded the most times was … drumroll …
gnome-settings-daemon with 46 uploads! Followed closely by livecd-rootfs
with 45.

:-)

Cheers,

-- 
Iain Lane  [ i...@orangesquash.org.uk ]
Debian Developer   [ la...@debian.org ]
Ubuntu Developer   [ la...@ubuntu.com ]
PhD student   [ i...@cs.nott.ac.uk ]


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Getting new packages into Ubuntu

[Omar B .]

On Monday, October 10, 2011 06:40:33 PM Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le lundi 10 octobre 2011 à 12:34 -0400, Scott Kitterman a écrit :
> > What rationale would there be for doing that for just Universe?  There
> > are
> > lots of leaf applications in Main and lots of libraries in Universe.
> 
> I think we should consider differently the system and the softwares so
> the using main and universe there might be wrong yes...
> 
> Using Ubuntu with Unity (or GNOME) as an example the "system" would be
> the plumber, plymouth, lightdm, the desktop shell and the features
> integrated with the desktop (image and documents viewers, file manager,
> etc). That part should be under a strict process, respect freezes, etc.
> 
> Then we have all the applications stack, basically things that microsoft
> users would go to install from the internet or that you would get from
> the appstores, those have no reason to have their freezes, schedules,
> etc tied to the OS itself or to the shell, they should be easier to
> update and be able to follow the rhythms upstream want to use for their
> softwares...
> 
> Does it make sense?
 

It does makes lots of sense.

Was a main topic a year ago at the UDS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT5fUcMUfYg

is a big and old problem that hasn't seen much progress yet.

But there is an old bug about this, which seems to be currently being worked on 
and/or used as reference/goal:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-center/+bug/578045


-Manuel B.
  
-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel