On 7/22/05, Sri Ramkrishna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Seems like the Ubuntu folks are coming up with the solutions anyways.
I (and I expect others) would certainly be displeased if we became dependent on a proprietary tool to manage our bugs or release process. As long as it isn't open, launchpad is not a solution, no matter how nice it is. If it is open (and the UI continues to improve) I expect I'll likely be one of the first to push us away from bugzilla and towards malone. > Also note that some of the problem might be that CVS might make it hard > to do. Agreed with this one- we must move to bzr, svk, or something in that vein to make the branching part of this manageable over the long term. Or rather, we don't *have* to, but I don't envy the poor soul who tries to do it with CVS. Luis > On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 00:22 -0400, Luis Villa wrote: > > On 7/22/05, Glynn Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Heya, > > > > > > > Please bear with me along the following rant. > > > > > > Okay, so this rant covers a lot of ground, but I have specific comments > > > from a Sun perspective - > > > > > > o As a Sun developer, I'd much rather the community focus on > > > churning out the next release of GNOME. Which is pretty much what > > > the average hacker wants to do, right - be innovative, develop > > > new features and generally get the desktop moving forward. Bug fixing > > > gets boring, and bug fixing on stable branches even more so ;) > > > > > > o I think it should be up to the various distributions to put their > > > bug fixing patches upstream, and onto the branches ASAP - so that > > > other distributions can also use them. Let's face it - there's > > > no value add in bug fixes, and if they don't get pushed upstream, > > > it makes GNOME look bad rather than other distributions. I'd > > > very much welcome a 'free for all' on the stable branches, past > > > the 2 or 3 official releases we do. > > > > > > Once upon a time Nat and I talked about having a centrally > > located/funded coordinator for the distros, known to be reasonably > > neutral, whose job it was to track bugs[1] in older versions, test > > patches against multiple versions, etc.- basically do the > > coordination/testing/release work that would solve some of the > > problems Federico very correctly highlighted. I still think it would > > likely be a good investment for the distros (who will all soon > > maintain multiple old versions that none of the developers want to > > touch) to pool some money and hire such a person. > > > > [1] At the time (right after the glow of 2.0) I was interested; most > > definitely am not these days, though I'd certainly lend my advice on > > the bug-tracking side. > > > > > o I'm trying to push a change in development process within Sun, so > > > that we can concentrate our core development on HEAD as much as > > > possible. We've been kicking this around internally for the past > > > couple of years, and now with our focus on OpenSolaris, I think it > > > should be more feasible to do than previously. As an added bonus, > > > we hope to be able to throw QA resources into that as well. All > > > this is going to take time though, and won't happen overnight. > > > > I have seen that mentioned in some blogs, and I agree it would be > > great to see- I hope it works out. > > > > Luis > > _______________________________________________ > > desktop-devel-list mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > > _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
