TeamReports

Application Review Board Reporting Page

Welcome to the Application Review Board reporting page. Every month this page should be filled with bullet points indicating the summary of some of the work you have been working on. As you work on something, try to summarise it here. A few guidelines for how to write good points here:

Keep it simple and short - single sentences are best.
Try to summarize your work and not be over-detailed - we don't need to know specifics, just a summary of the kind of work involved
Where possible, include relevant links.

The Report

Meeting 2011-11-25
- Chair: Andrew Mitchell
- Present: Allison Randal, Stéphane Graber, Bhavani Shankar, Jonathan Carter, Luke Faraone
- Apologies: Shane Fagan
Action Review
- DONE: Explore a "patch pilot" program, where ARB members take scheduled slots.
- DONE: Checked that nothing was copied over to the Precise repository
MyApps access
- ARB members have access, https://launchpad.net/bugs/886366 is blocking downloading some apps for review.
Review pilot scheme
- Allison had taken the first session a week prior to the meeting, creating packaging for a few applications & submitting one to Debian
Issues to resolve
- Quickly creates packages that build-depend on the deprecated python-support, instead of dh_python2
  - [ACTION] Luke to look into fixing bug 894582
- Applications submitted without source, which need to be
  - [Action] Allison to create https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard/Review/Responses
Applications submitted that aren't 'useful'
- Discussion of what guidelines we should use for rejecting applications summarised on http://pad.ubuntu.com/arb-guidelines
  - 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 must be useful or interesting to a general audience.
  - The process only applies to a specific version of an application (e.g. PyJunior 1.0 or PyJunior 1.2).
  - 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 [http://people.canonical.com/~cjwatson/ubuntu-policy/policy.html/ch-archive.html#s-ulp].
  - When an application is approved as part of this process, Ubuntu developers may make changes or improvements to a package before it is uploaded to the archive or after it is in the archive.
  - 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.
Backports & ARB submissions
- ARB applications should be able to depend on backported libraries
- [ACTION] Andrew to ask about technical limitations of ARB apps depending on backported packages
Next meeting time:
- Last Friday of December doesn't work well for most people, next meeting time was decided as 9th december, 18:00 UTC where we'll decide if we need a mid-January meeting.
- Next chair for meeting is Stéphane Graber

Previous Reports

2011

2010

AppReviewBoard/TeamReports/10/December

CategoryTeamReport