Diff for "LEP/DerivativeDistributions"

Not logged in - Log In / Register

Differences between revisions 4 and 5
Revision 4 as of 2010-05-18 22:07:16
Size: 3051
Comment:
Revision 5 as of 2010-05-18 22:12:03
Size: 3045
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 70: Line 70:
   * A distribution that's just customization practically demands to be
    
played with
   * A distribution that's just customization practically demands to be played with

Derivative Distributions

XXX - more text here

As an OEM provider
I want to make a customized version of Ubuntu
so that I can ship the OS best suited to my hardware

Rationale

Why are we doing this now?

What value does this give our users? Which users?

Stakeholders

  • Kiko Reis
  • OEM Services
    • cody
    • smagoun
  • ???

Constraints

What MUST the new behaviour provide?

What MUST it not do?

Subfeatures

Brainstorming:

  • Ability to push a bug upstream to a parent distribution
  • Official package branch maintenance for derivatives
  • Full archive services for these distributions
  • See the difference between a derivative and its parent
    • Which packages are newer / older
  • Copy packages over without rebuilding them
    • jml isn't sure if this is a thing
      • james_w: it is, may want a policy on the archive to say whether rebuilds are default or not.
  • Support different release cycles and release models from the parent distro
    • OEM case is frequently a small, finite number of rolling releases
  • Translations
  • merge-o-matic type functionality
  • Automatic, configurable propagation rules for packages.
  • Configurable constraints like preventing someone from uploading a package with the same version as a package in a parent distribution (binaries will have conflicting checksums) or uploading a package with an incorrect version (ex. a version that will most likely be higher then the next upload in a parent distribution; ie. version scheme constraints).

Workflows

What are the workflows for this feature?

  • Create a distribution
  • Enter additional data about the relationships between the new distribution and other distributions AND/OR launchpad automatically detects those relationships via the ancestry of the packages in the distribution's archives.

Success

How will we know when we are done?

One possible measure: when we can build Debian on Launchpad the way we build Ubuntu.

Another POV: When Ubuntu can become a derivative of Debian in launchpad.

How will we measure how well we have done?

Thoughts?

  • Check over the Ubuntu owner / bug supervisor etc model and see if it's relevant to non-standard projects
  • Look up past literature on this subject
  • Image building suddenly becomes way more interesting with this
    • A distribution that's just customization practically demands to be played with
    • Cody: Launchpad should focus on improving existing services before jumping into image building. External services and tools can be used in the mean time.
  • What Ubuntu-specific scripts are we running against Launchpad
  • Is this a for-pay service?
  • Derivative distributions should be first class distributions.
  • A derivative distribution can be a distribution derived from a derived distribution and so on.
  • Configurable, entirely flexible, powerful policies about behaviors are key.

LEP/DerivativeDistributions (last edited 2011-07-25 09:29:56 by rvb)