Launchpad Entry: packaging-docs-revisited
This should provide an overview of the issue/functionality/change proposed here. Focus here on what will actually be DONE, summarising that so that other people don't have to read the whole spec.
This section should include a paragraph describing the end-user impact of this change. It is meant to be included in the release notes of the first release in which it is implemented. (Not all of these will actually be included in the release notes, at the release manager's discretion; but writing them is a useful exercise.)
It is mandatory.
This should cover the _why_: why is this change being proposed, what justifies it, where we see this justified.
You can have subsections that better describe specific parts of the issue.
This section should describe a plan of action (the "how") to implement the changes discussed. Could include subsections like:
Should cover changes required to the UI, or specific UI that is required to implement this
Code changes should include an overview of what needs to change, and in some cases even the specific details.
- data migration, if any
- redirects from old URLs to new ones, if any
- how users will be pointed to the new way of doing things, if necessary.
It's important that we are able to test new features, and demonstrate them to users. Use this section to describe a short plan that anybody can follow that demonstrates the feature is working. This can then be used during CD testing, and to show off after release.
This need not be added or completed until the specification is nearing beta.
This should highlight any issues that should be addressed in further specifications, and not problems with the specification itself; since any specification with problems cannot be approved.
BoF agenda and discussion
Use this section to take notes during the BoF; if you keep it in the approved spec, use it for summarising what was discussed and note any options that were rejected.
- link to debian reference, not duplicate too much
- send diffs to debian packaging guide
- different indexes
- ubuntu packaging for debian folks
- NEW contributors, who have months to become MOTU
- people who want to present stuff to their peers
- use categories, have modular bits
- regularly refresh and update with FAQ bits
- ask new contributors to add stuff when asking questions
Review from pitti
GettingStarted: proposes dh-make, but this doesn't produce good results (way too much boilerplate, weird debian/rules with config.guess mangling, even at the wrong place, creates non-package-prefixed dh files such as debian/dirs)
GettingStarted: pbuilder is too complex here, should be mentioned later when source packages have been described (with build deps, etc.)
- Basic: mention dch --create to get the template
- Basic: important aspect of cdbs: factorizes and centralizes build code, so that global changes, Policy shifts become feasible; it also forces a clean packaging structure (using debhelper properly rather than error prone hacks in debian/rules)
- Basic: strongly suggest to read manpages for debhelper programs, at least debhelper(7), dh_install(1), and dh_installdeb(1).
Updating: dpatch stuff should be merged into PatchSystems Ubuntu: POT building should be factorized in cdbs' langpacks.mk or kde.mk (it is already for Gnome)
- Open week provides a single point of contact for learning that can theoretically be done at any time with the docs. Support is more important.
- Debian maintainer of debian new maintainers guide prefers bugs and patches against the guide
- Forums are a huge potential base of new contributors
- But generalloy poor rate of getting them into IRC, wheras launchpad users in a bug report are more likely to respond.
- Packaging guide needs samples for 4 or 5 different kinds of packages (daemon, etc.)
- Recipes are a good idea - but for common tasks
- Packaging guide be modular
- - example module like the loco team knowledge base
- add output of man -k dh_ to packaging guide somewhere
Spec/PackagingDocsRevisited (last edited 2008-08-06 16:22:59 by localhost)