Subject: False info on Mir's project page

From: Daniel van Vugt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 10:44:19 +0800

I notice, as predicted, we had to change the development focus back to 
"utopic" despite that being obviously wrong:
    https://launchpad.net/mir
It also makes the milestone graph misleading and the latest download 
link wrong...

This was expected because the branch alias lp:mir is dynamically derived 
from the "Development focus" and its series branch. If you (correctly) 
say the development focus is "0.5" then you get lp:mir pointing to no 
branch at all (which is actually correct as 0.5 has no branch set for it 
while we use development-branch instead).

Unfortunately Ubuntu packaging builds from lp:mir, I think. So that's 
something we need to get changed and point it to the real packaging 
branch instead:
    lp:~mir-team/mir/utopic
Then we would be free to reclaim alias "lp:mir" as our own :)

Anyone know how to get packaging to use a different branch path?

- Daniel

---

From: Cemil Azizoglu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:43:30 +0300

I raised this with the CI team. Well, they at least didn't shoot the idea
down right away and were willing to consider it. sil2100 said he'd think
over the consequences and get back to us.

Apparently, there is an (un)written rule that one should be able to get the
latest distro code by pulling from lp:projname, which we would be violated.
I raised the point that it's important to have a coherent launchpad project
page.

We'll see what happens.

-Cemil

---

From: Daniel van Vugt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 14:51:51 +0800

You know we could just let lp:mir/0.5 be the development branch and be 
more careful about noticing ABI breaks (at which point we must branch). 
Then everyone wins and lp:mir would be the development branch as well as 
one for packaging in Ubuntu-next.

So long as distro releases didn't happen without warning, which I think 
they can't as we'd have to approve changelog additions, then why not let 
distro package from our latest and greatest code?

On 11/07/14 14:43, Cemil Azizoglu wrote:
> I raised this with the CI team. Well, they at least didn't shoot the
> idea down right away and were willing to consider it. sil2100 said he'd
> think over the consequences and get back to us.
>
> Apparently, there is an (un)written rule that one should be able to get
> the latest distro code by pulling from lp:projname, which we would be
> violated. I raised the point that it's important to have a coherent
> launchpad project page.
>
> We'll see what happens.
>
> -Cemil

---

From: Daniel van Vugt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 14:53:24 +0800

I am assuming that RTM != Utopic. RTM would be more stable fixed on 0.4 
while Utopic would be >=0.5.

---

From: Cemil Azizoglu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 10:12:59 +0300

So you mean make devel == trunk. Now you've opened a can of worms... :-)

-- 
Cemil Azizoglu
Mir Display Server - Team Lead
Canonical USA

---

From: Daniel van Vugt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 15:26:20 +0800

Well, that's ideal if you expect your latest code to make it into utopic 
eventually. Get it in there ASAP.

Yet another option would be to get distro to package Utopic from the 
branch that Ubuntu is pointing at. That's presently 0.4:
   https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mir
Thus Ubuntu could use that setting and know to package Utopic from 
lp:mir/0.4

On 11/07/14 15:12, Cemil Azizoglu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Daniel van Vugt
> <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>>
> wrote:
>
>     I am assuming that RTM != Utopic. RTM would be more stable fixed on
>     0.4 while Utopic would be >=0.5.
>
>
>