launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[James Westby <jw+debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 12:36:28 +0000, Jonathan Lange <jml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> There are open questions about how it matches with some UI issues, and
> >> how we store the recipes given the fact that they aren't necessarily
> >> tied to a single series.
> >>
> 
> Storage should be guided by the UI, not the other way around.

Indeed, what I meant was:

  traversal needs to be considered, as the current plan falls down to
  some extent if a recipe doesn't have a single target series. In
  addition there are open UI questions about which recipe to present to
  the user given that the current mockups lead them to choose the recipe
  before selecting target distroseries. If they are looking at a
  packaging branch then we can key of that, but even then do you show
  all recipes that have been used to build for that series? Only those
  that had a successful build? What do you show if none have been built
  for the series yet (e.g. the day after we release lucid and open m***)

> Looks good.
> 
>  * The "Error handling" section should mention the case where
> insert-nested refers to a "merge" line.

Indeed.

>  * I don't think namespacing is too much

Ok.

>  * There's no way to change the base branch

Yes, unless we have the implicit "base" name associated with it.

>  * It looks like it has the potential to be very confusing

Could you be a little more verbose?

>    * Perhaps one way to help with this is to have a tool that displays
> the recipe that results from the derivation

Certainly.

>  * Why not "remove"?

If you aint gonna need it...

Probably worth adding and shouldn't be too hard though.

> What's the next step?

I need to know that the proposals here allow for the desired UI to be
implemented, and we need a decision on the two options in the
multi-series proposal.

Once we have something that works well for the user experience I can
implement it or help someone else through the process.

I will be waiting on confirmation from the LP team on what they would
like to have, preferably with (updated) mockups that outline how they
will map to the new features.

Thanks,

James