[maemo-developers] debmaster priorities [YOUR INPUT HERE]

[From: Jeremiah Foster]

On May 13, 2009, at 10:54, Quim Gil wrote:

> ext Jeremiah Foster wrote:
>> Yes. I will try to create an additional channel in addition to the
>> others with the goal of trying to be more available.
>
> "Being available" is the main task of the debmaster, I think.  
> Everything
> else comes from the problems this "availability" brings:
>
> - If you spend a lot of time answering basic questions about X, Y, Z  
> it
> means that X, Y, Z needs to be better documented.
>
> - If you spend a lot of time dealing with problems related with  
> missing
> dependencies and conflicting packages it means that work is needed  
> there
> making easier to bring/port dependencies and preventing conflicts.
>
> - If you spend a lot of time with packages that violate the Maemo  
> policy
> there is probably some work to do around that.
>
> etc
>
> I'm not saying that all the work should be ad-hoc and see what the day
> brings, but the day to day should define the planning agenda.

One thing I might note that is not highly visible is the server side  
development that gets done. If we want a better user experience with  
the Application Manager, the repositories have to be in good shape. If  
we want garage to be available, we need a stable platform. If we want  
QA, we need to build the tools, infrastructure and policy.

I think we need to discuss that work because I think there is a lot of  
it, most of the time Niels makes it look easy.

> About the current sprint, let's not touch it (it's good to keep the  
> deal
> signed among the sprint participants in the monthly meeting) but  
> please
> consider all this in the next sprint plan.

I did change the priorities somewhat based on your suggestions and  
some feedback from others. I think you're right about building diablo  
apps in fremantle. After doing one new successful build and seeing how  
I can automate this, I don't think it should be a huge rearrangement  
of time, so I think this sprint should work out as planned.

To summarize a bit; I think the feedback I am receiving is that I need  
to be more proactive and visible in places like iTT and take up the  
discussion with developers about packaging. From my perspective, that  
means reducing the amount of repository work to some degree and  
replacing that with "real time" packaging discussions, policy changes,  
and other documentation.

Does that sound about right?

Jeremiah