launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

["Francis J. Lacoste" <francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Michael,

In the build record history case, I think there were two aspects:

1- Like you point out, communication around the hand off came a little late

2- and from my understanding, it's not accurate to say that Soyuz was updated 
without affecting the other areas. I know that for both Translations and Code, 
at one point they were *forced* to scramble and update their part because that 
was required to fix some breakage. Sorry, to be hand-wavy around the precise 
breakage that required completing that refactoring, but if you are interested, 
I'm sure Danilo, and Aaron or Tim can fill in the details.

To reiterate, it's ok, although not ideal, when a large change requires a 
hands off to the other teams. But it's very important that this hand off 
doesn't mean that other team have to disrupt their schedule to take it.

Cheers

-- 
Francis J. Lacoste
francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

On October 8, 2010, Michael Nelson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Francis J. Lacoste
> 
> <francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > For illustration purpose only, two recent examples of rippled changes
> > that should happen differently next time:
> > 
> > - New way to handle OOPS in cron scripts
> > - Refactoring of the build record history
> 
> Similarly, for my/our own learning, I'd be keen to know other ways we
> could have improved this process for the build refactoring. We tried
> to involve everyone in the refactor design (both canonical and
> community), got agreement before implementing and updated the soyuz
> component to the new model without affecting other areas.
> 
> FWIW, I had planned to go all the way and also update code and
> translations to the new models also, but was not able to (having to
> move onto other soyuz priorities). As soon as I was aware of this I
> tried to make sure code/translations were aware of what would need to
> be done when they had time (sitting with both Aaron and Jeroen in
> Prague to work through examples). I'm sure communication wasn't
> perfect (and never will be), but I'd be keen to know how we could have
> improved our communication of the changes.
> 
> Thanks!
> Michael

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.