Review

Differences between revisions 12 and 20 (spanning 8 versions)
Revision 12 as of 2011-10-25 16:50:41
Size: 5563
Editor: allison
Comment:
Revision 20 as of 2012-11-15 16:51:23
Size: 4346
Editor: bhavi
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 3: Line 3:
New submissions to the ARB come through the [[http://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com|myapps.developer.ubuntu.com]] web interface. The apps relevant to the ARB have $0.00 price and a FLOSS license. If you have a reviewer account on this system (there's still some development work to do to create a general-purpose ARB queue in the interface, so not all ARB members have accounts yet), log in, and you'll see a link to "View applications up for review". New submissions to the ARB come through the [[http://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com|developer portal]] web interface. The apps relevant to the ARB have $0.00 price and a FLOSS license. All ARB members have a reviewer account on this system, log in and you'll see a link to "View ARB applications up for review or pending QA". There is also a [[https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/arb/|public, read-only view of this queue]].
Line 7: Line 7:
Some common errors can be prefiltered within MyApps, such as submitting a binary package or tarball instead of a source package or tarball. From the Details page for the app, click "Start review". Fill in your query for the app developer, and click "Ask for information". Some common messages:

{{{
Could you submit this as a source package rather than a binary package? You can create this by running 'debuild -S', and send us the .orig.tar.gz, .diff.gz, and .dsc files. For more information, see:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete#Building_the_Package_.28Source_and_Binary.29
}}}

{{{
Could you submit this as a source tarball rather than a binary tarball? That is, bundle up the files before you run the build/install process, so we get the full source. If you have questions about how to do this, we can walk you through it. Contact us here, or on the ubuntu-app-devel@lists.ubuntu.com mailing list or #ubuntu-app-devel IRC channel on Freenode.
}}}

{{{
Could you submit instructions for building, installing, and running the app? It looks like this will depend on the xxxxx package, which is available in Ubuntu. The version of Xxxxxx shipped in Oneiric is X.XX.
}}}

=== Migrate to Launchpad ===

At the moment, we manually create a Launchpad ticket for ARB submissions, using the following template:

{{{
NOTE: This submission was sent through the MyApps process.

= Application Review For <application name> =

 * Name: <submitter's name>
 * Email: <submitter's email>
 * Application name:
 * Tagline:
 * Keywords:
 * Description:
 * License:
 * Support URL:
 * Package file (link):
 * Images (links):
   * 128x128:
   * 64x64:
   * 32x32:
   * 16x16:
   * Screenshot:
 * Known issues:
  * Issue.
  * Issue.

=== Status ===

<one of the states from http://developer.ubuntu.com/publish/application-states/, not the same as the bug state in Launchpad>

=== Application Notes ===

<additional notes about the application, if any>

}}}

Once you've created the ticket, click the "Start review" button on the bottom of the page. On the next page, fill in the "Review comment" field with:

{{{
You can track the status of your ongoing application on Launchpad.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-app-review-board/+bug/######

You might want to subscribe to the ticket, to be be notified of all changes.
}}}

Then click the "Submit to ARB" button at the bottom of the page.
Some common errors can be quickly prefiltered in the [[http://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com|developer portal]], such as submitting a binary package or tarball instead of a source package or tarball. From the Details page for the app, click "Start review". Fill in your query for the app developer, and click "Ask for information". Some common feedback messages are collected at [[AppReviewBoard/Review/Responses]].
Line 75: Line 11:
Check the app for the following criteria, noting each as Pass/Fail, and including any comments. Add your results as a comment to the bug ticket for the submission. Check the app for the following criteria, noting each as Pass/Fail, and including any comments.

==== Content ====

 * Content is suitable under the terms of the Ubuntu Code Of Conduct
 * Submissions should be applications, not stand-alone documentation or media (image bundles, fonts, movies).
 * Apps should not be forks of existing applications in the Ubuntu archive (main/universe/etc).
 * Apps should be useful or interesting to a general audience.
 * No other software can depend on the application being submitted (e.g. development libraries should be submitted to main/universe or upstream to Debian instead).
 * Applications must be Free/Libre/Open Source software. We follow the [[http://people.canonical.com/~cjwatson/ubuntu-policy/policy.html/ch-archive.html#s-ulp|Ubuntu Licensing Policy]].
 * Applications must be able to be built with tools & libraries in the Ubuntu archive. Apps may bundle additional libraries they depend on, but may not include new versions of already packaged libraries.

==== Running ====

 * Application runs correctly
 * Major features operate as expected
 * Does not perform any malicious actions
Line 85: Line 37:
  ==== Run Tests ====

 * Application runs correctly
 * Major features operate as expected
 * Does not perform any malicious actions

==== Content ====

 * Content is suitable under the terms of the Ubuntu Code Of Conduct
Line 101: Line 43:
When the the reviewer considers the application ready for vote, the reviewer will raise it on the ARB mailing list. Votes on the application are made in the bug ticket comments, using the format: When the reviewer considers the application ready for vote, the reviewer will raise it on the ARB mailing list with the subject '''[VOTE] Application Review: <application name>'''. Votes on the application are made in replies on the mailing list, using the format:
Line 104: Line 46:
= Application Review Board Response =
Line 106: Line 47:
 * '''MEMBER''': <ARB member's name>
 * '''VOTE''': <+1 or -1>
 * '''NOTES''': <additional input on the request, if any>
 MEMBER: <ARB member's name>
 VOTE: <+1 or -1>
 NOTES: <additional input on the request (optional)>
Line 112: Line 53:
If the voting for a particular app happens on the mailing list, or in IRC, one member may post a list of all the votes in one comment.

 * Three or more +1 votes mean the application is approved.
 * Three or more -1 votes mean the application is rejected.
 * Two +1 votes (1 vote from a UbuntuDeveloper and 1 vote from ARB member) mean the application is approved.
 * Two -1 votes mean the application is rejected/pushed back to the app developer for further review.
Line 118: Line 57:
One member will summarize the results and add it as a comment to the submission.
Line 119: Line 60:
Line 121: Line 63:
 * Make sure the screenshot/icon branch has been merged and published (can take a while).  * Make sure the links to the screenshot in debian/control point to software-center.ubuntu.com and not myapps.developer.ubuntu.com.

New Submissions

New submissions to the ARB come through the developer portal web interface. The apps relevant to the ARB have $0.00 price and a FLOSS license. All ARB members have a reviewer account on this system, log in and you'll see a link to "View ARB applications up for review or pending QA". There is also a public, read-only view of this queue.

Prefiltering

Some common errors can be quickly prefiltered in the developer portal, such as submitting a binary package or tarball instead of a source package or tarball. From the Details page for the app, click "Start review". Fill in your query for the app developer, and click "Ask for information". Some common feedback messages are collected at AppReviewBoard/Review/Responses.

Review

Check the app for the following criteria, noting each as Pass/Fail, and including any comments.

Content

  • Content is suitable under the terms of the Ubuntu Code Of Conduct
  • Submissions should be applications, not stand-alone documentation or media (image bundles, fonts, movies).
  • Apps should not be forks of existing applications in the Ubuntu archive (main/universe/etc).
  • Apps should be useful or interesting to a general audience.
  • No other software can depend on the application being submitted (e.g. development libraries should be submitted to main/universe or upstream to Debian instead).
  • Applications must be Free/Libre/Open Source software. We follow the Ubuntu Licensing Policy.

  • Applications must be able to be built with tools & libraries in the Ubuntu archive. Apps may bundle additional libraries they depend on, but may not include new versions of already packaged libraries.

Running

  • Application runs correctly
  • Major features operate as expected
  • Does not perform any malicious actions

Packaging

  • The application is well packaged using the Debian packaging system
  • All correct dependencies are met
  • Application installs cleanly
  • Application can be removed cleanly
  • Includes suitable copyright and licensing content
  • Application integrates into the desktop, with appropriate Launcher or menu entries

If the app fails on any points, the reviewer will contact the submitter with suggestions for changes.

Voting

When the reviewer considers the application ready for vote, the reviewer will raise it on the ARB mailing list with the subject [VOTE] Application Review: <application name>. Votes on the application are made in replies on the mailing list, using the format:

 MEMBER: <ARB member's name>
 VOTE: <+1 or -1>
 NOTES: <additional input on the request (optional)>
  • Two +1 votes (1 vote from a UbuntuDeveloper and 1 vote from ARB member) mean the application is approved.

  • Two -1 votes mean the application is rejected/pushed back to the app developer for further review.
  • If there are questions about an application, it may be held for further discussion and review.

One member will summarize the results and add it as a comment to the submission.

Pre-upload review procedure

Before uploading a package to the ARB PPA, the ARB member should quickly go through this checklist to make sure not to miss anything:

  • Make sure the links to the screenshot in debian/control point to software-center.ubuntu.com and not myapps.developer.ubuntu.com.
  • Look for typos in the packaging, one that we missed was a typo in the Screenshot or Icon name
  • Make sure the version number is consistent with: <upstream>-0extras<release>.<X> where X starts at 1 with the first upload. Example: 1.2.3-0extras11.04.1 for the first upload of a package with the upstream version 1.2.3

  • Merge changelog entries to only have one entry per upload to the extras PPA
  • Triple check the target distro
  • Run lintian on both source and binary package one last time
  • Upload to the PPA. Make sure it builds fine and that it then shows up on extras.ubuntu.com (within 24 hours).
  • Check in Software Center that it shows up properly and installs fine.
  • [OPTIONAL] Blog about it

AppReviewBoard/Review (last edited 2012-11-15 16:51:23 by bhavi)