On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:34:33PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > I happened to have recently run across a discussion about this spreadsheet, > so > I am, merely by coincidence, aware of it. While almost all of the packages > on > their list are on the phone image, some of them are not limited to the phone, > in particular qtwebkit 5.1.1 that was just landed without a lot of discussion > outside their team. I don't think such general packages should be on a list > of packages that Touch "controls". qtwebkit-opensource-src is in both the > Ubuntu Desktop and Kubuntu packagesets. > > This completely unannounced list of packages they don't want people to touch, > doesn't help much if it's not announced. This needs to go to U-D-A, but it > does need (as you did put it) to be in form a request. We don't have > maintainer locks on packages in Ubuntu and that's an organizational feature > we > should maintain.
I think this is more of an extended "block while preparing milestone images" than a maintainer lock, FWIW (and for example I'm hoping that we won't need quite such strict controls when not in the run-up to a release and will be advocating for that when the time comes; I doubt that this level of manual checking will be sustainable even on a personal level for very long). I don't have much knowledge of the qtwebkit case specifically, though obviously I feel that it smooths things for everyone if people actually talk to each other in cases of overlap. > > So, I've set up an ~ubuntu-touch-release team with a list of members > > given by Alexander Sack, and I plan to give them a hints bzr branch > > shortly with the delegated ability to use the "block" and "unblock" > > hints. At the moment we have no way to access-control this to just > > certain images, but TBH I trust that those people are way too busy at > > the moment to want to spend time interfering with anyone else. :-) If > > it becomes a problem then I can certainly look into that. > > Several of the people in the team are not ubuntu-dev. I don't think we > should > be handing out britney access to non-developers. I think the subset of the > team that are Ubuntu Developers would be fine (and there's at least one > non-dev > on the team that could, I'm sure, trivially get it back if he asked the DMB). I've reduced ~ubuntu-touch-release to a subset of ~ubuntu-dev, and pointed the ex-core-dev in question to the DMB. > I think as long as access is limited to Ubuntu Developers and they only > manage > packages that are unique to their images/package sets it's a reasonable thing > to do (a quick scan of the packages on the spreadsheet suggests to me that > qtwebkit-opensource-src is the only package that affects (and it's been > landed). > > For the future, I'd suggest these teams be limited to core-dev or MOTU/flavor > dev with some demonstrated understanding of archive wide management issues. > All the Ubuntu Dev on the currently proposed team are core-dev, so that > distinction isn't relevant to the current experiment. Thanks for the feedback. I'm inclined to agree in general. -- Colin Watson [[email protected]] -- Ubuntu-release mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
