DeveloperApplication-CoreDev
|
Size: 5636
Comment:
|
Size: 4851
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 1: | Line 1: |
| ## page was renamed from JulianAndresKlode/DeveloperApplication-PPU ## page was renamed from JulianAndresKlode/DeveloperApplication-PPU2 ## page was copied from UbuntuDevelopment/DeveloperApplicationTemplate |
|
| Line 4: | Line 7: |
| ---- '''Please do not edit this page. It is a template to be used by people applying as an Ubuntu developer.''' |
'''I, Julian Andres Klode, apply for upload rights for core-dev.''' |
| Line 7: | Line 9: |
| Head over to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/YourName/YourDeveloperApplication instead and make use of this template. ---- '''I, <YOUR NAME>, apply for <universe-contributor|MOTU|core-dev|upload rights for package(s) <X>>.''' || '''Name''' || <YOUR NAME> || || '''Launchpad Page''' || <link to your launchpad page> || || '''Wiki Page''' || <link to your Wiki page> || |
|| '''Name''' || Julian || || '''Launchpad Page''' || https://launchpad.net/~juliank || || '''Wiki Page''' || [[JulianAndresKlode]] || |
| Line 20: | Line 14: |
| ''Tell us a bit about yourself.'' | I am a Debian Developer involved in / sometimes leading python-apt development. I have developed dh-autoreconf and hardlink and maintain various other packages in Debian. I'm also working on APT, and currently am the one doing the releases and maintaining the xenial branch. |
| Line 23: | Line 17: |
| ''Tell us how and when you got involved, what you liked working on and what you could probably do better.'' | |
| Line 26: | Line 19: |
I started using Ubuntu productively in 2006, and since then have contributed to Ubuntu mostly through fixing bugs in Debian and by syncing them in Ubuntu. I am an Ubuntu member, and recently also a member of Ubuntu bug control. |
|
| Line 27: | Line 25: |
Porting python-apt to Python 3, writing dh-autoreconf, and improving APT: SHA1 deprecation, fetcher sandboxing, new pinning engine, and other stuff. |
|
| Line 28: | Line 29: |
| Non-checkbox areas of work within Ubuntu include [[https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/727416|Ubiquity]] and [[https://code.launchpad.net/~roadmr/ubuntu/natty/casper/709364||Casper]] (that bug resurfaced [[https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/casper/+bug/809885|here]] and Stéphane Graber was kind enough to squash it). The folks in charge of these projects are always very responsive and patient, which I really appreciate. | |
| Line 30: | Line 30: |
| Checkbox's situation has changed in the past several months. The Hardware Certification team has been growing in terms of people who can devote time working on Checkbox. This has meant we're much more able to tackle the large bug backlog the project had, while also adding new features and keeping up to date with Ubuntu's evolution. Since a large part of Checkbox are the test scripts, and these need to interact with the kernel and other APIs that keep evolving, they need constant maintenance and updating. Examples that come to mind are the recent migration to UDisks2 (for Ubuntu Quantal), the upgrade to Python3 (Quantal as well), migration to Gtk3 (for Ubuntu 11.10), and changes to APIs for Network Manager. | I mostly work on APT right now, but I also maintain several other packages in Debian and also work on APT reverse dependencies from time to time. I've worked a lot with mvo, and a lot of different people helped me sponsor uploads and APT SRUs. |
| Line 32: | Line 32: |
| As a team we've managed to greatly reduce the amount of open and new bugs for [https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/checkbox/||ubuntu/checkbox]] (Currently 16 open bugs and 2 new ones). Checkbox's trunk/upstream branch still has a large number of open bugs (bug list [[https://bugs.launchpad.net/checkbox/|here]]). However we've drastically reduced the number of open (unlooked-at) ones, and I've been focusing on analyzing open bugs and giving them a clear "statement of work" for developers to work on; this way they can potentially jump straight into coding a solution. I felt this was more conducent to many people working on these triaged bugs, as opposed to i.e. me going over them one-by-one, analyzing, and fixing them. This way developers, both from our team and outside, can work in "parallel" to fix these bugs, and they also don't need to spare brainpower finding a bug to fix. | I'm also involved in hplip packaging on the Debian side, which is kind of weird and partially non-free right now. |
| Line 34: | Line 34: |
| I've also been trying to tag smaller bugs with "bitesize" to encourage community participation. This has indeed resulted in a few of these bugs being fixed by community members. We've also tried to be extra responsive to contributions to Checkbox from outside the certification team, to further encourage contributions, this has also resulted in more people knowing about checkbox and potentially considering it when searching for a test runner application. As a result the number of commits per release has grown dramatically, from 30 for the Natty cycle to 217 for the Oneiric cycle, 334 for Precise and 301 for Quantal. Particularly for the Precise cycle, this resulted in our uploads to Ubuntu having very large changelogs, which made reviewers' lives difficult. So for Quantal, despite having slightly less commits and bugfixes, we had a more regular upload cadence, with smaller changesets to ease work for reviewers and sponsors. Also, in order to ensure our package uploads are sane, we've been ramping up our "unit test" coverage, which also validates that data files contain no errors, that translated versions don't cause crashes, and that the code passes some basic "lint" tests. These processes have already caught a few errors. We complement this with a daily from-trunk PPA build which sends a notification if these automated tests fail, so we can catch these basic problems even if some bogus code makes it into the trunk branch. |
I also maintain various small utilities, the best known is dh-autoreconf which recently became a dependency of debhelper itself. |
| Line 42: | Line 38: |
| I'd like to have more time to fix bugs and improve my software, but university keeps me busy, so I only have time sporadically. |
|
| Line 44: | Line 42: |
I plan to bring support for aptitude patterns to APT and introduce seccomp sandboxing for fetchers. Some of those changes probably require changes in reverse dependencies. I'm also interested in adding an AppArmor layer to our sandboxing, but have not checked yet if that makes sense. Obviously, I also plan to fix a lot of bugs and upload a lot of new APT releases. I also hope to get the hplip packaging in a sane state copyright wise (it's synced). |
|
| Line 45: | Line 50: |
| ''Please describe what you like least in Ubuntu and what thoughts do you have about fixing it.'' | Bugs are annoying. Let us fix them! |
| Line 55: | Line 62: |
| == mvo == === General feedback === I worked with Julian for a couple of year, first on python-apt, then on apt itself. His work is always high quality and he has a good judgement. I trust Julian that he will do a good job maintaining apt/python-apt. I'm sure he will also do a good job with the others fwiw, its just that all my work with him was centered around apt/python-apt :) == xnox == Please grant JulianK Ubuntu Core Developer rights, he knows what he is doing. Anything else would be silly, given that he effectively lands apt into Ubuntu already anyway. {{{ <xnox> rbasak, the list of PPU packages he requests are fine. However, he also finds things and fixes bugs in other dependant packages, and is capable of being an effective core dev =) * xnox wants juliank as a core dev, cause he would be a good core dev =) <rbasak> The first part of that reason is a good reason. The second part is a good endorsement but not in itself a reason :) <rbasak> Please put your reasons in your endorsement ;) }}} == Martin Pitt == I've followed Julian's work for a long time now. I fully trust his very capable skills in the world of apt and related packages, and he is very enthusiastic and engaged to fix things in Ubuntu as well. He also knows about our release process and freezes and coordinates updates accordingly. I fully support and recommend granting PPU rights -- in fact, I also fully support him becoming a full core developer. |
|
| Line 70: | Line 94: |
| ## Uncomment the one that applies for you and please remove the others. ## ## [[CategoryCoreDevApplication]] ## [[CategoryMOTUApplication]] ## [[CategoryUniverseContributorApplication]] ## [[CategoryPerPackageUploaderApplication]] |
[[CategoryCoreDevApplication]] |
Contents |
I, Julian Andres Klode, apply for upload rights for core-dev.
Name |
Julian |
Launchpad Page |
|
Wiki Page |
Who I am
I am a Debian Developer involved in / sometimes leading python-apt development. I have developed dh-autoreconf and hardlink and maintain various other packages in Debian. I'm also working on APT, and currently am the one doing the releases and maintaining the xenial branch.
My Ubuntu story
My involvement
I started using Ubuntu productively in 2006, and since then have contributed to Ubuntu mostly through fixing bugs in Debian and by syncing them in Ubuntu.
I am an Ubuntu member, and recently also a member of Ubuntu bug control.
Examples of my work / Things I'm proud of
Porting python-apt to Python 3, writing dh-autoreconf, and improving APT: SHA1 deprecation, fetcher sandboxing, new pinning engine, and other stuff.
Areas of work
I mostly work on APT right now, but I also maintain several other packages in Debian and also work on APT reverse dependencies from time to time. I've worked a lot with mvo, and a lot of different people helped me sponsor uploads and APT SRUs.
I'm also involved in hplip packaging on the Debian side, which is kind of weird and partially non-free right now.
I also maintain various small utilities, the best known is dh-autoreconf which recently became a dependency of debhelper itself.
Things I could do better
I'd like to have more time to fix bugs and improve my software, but university keeps me busy, so I only have time sporadically.
Plans for the future
General
I plan to bring support for aptitude patterns to APT and introduce seccomp sandboxing for fetchers. Some of those changes probably require changes in reverse dependencies. I'm also interested in adding an AppArmor layer to our sandboxing, but have not checked yet if that makes sense.
Obviously, I also plan to fix a lot of bugs and upload a lot of new APT releases.
I also hope to get the hplip packaging in a sane state copyright wise (it's synced).
What I like least in Ubuntu
Bugs are annoying. Let us fix them!
Comments
If you'd like to comment, but are not the applicant or a sponsor, do it here. Don't forget to sign with @SIG@.
Endorsements
As a sponsor, just copy the template below, fill it out and add it to this section.
mvo
General feedback
I worked with Julian for a couple of year, first on python-apt, then on apt itself. His work is always high quality and he has a good judgement. I trust Julian that he will do a good job maintaining apt/python-apt. I'm sure he will also do a good job with the others fwiw, its just that all my work with him was centered around apt/python-apt
xnox
Please grant JulianK Ubuntu Core Developer rights, he knows what he is doing. Anything else would be silly, given that he effectively lands apt into Ubuntu already anyway.
<xnox> rbasak, the list of PPU packages he requests are fine. However, he also finds things and fixes bugs in other dependant packages, and is capable of being an effective core dev =) * xnox wants juliank as a core dev, cause he would be a good core dev =) <rbasak> The first part of that reason is a good reason. The second part is a good endorsement but not in itself a reason :) <rbasak> Please put your reasons in your endorsement ;)
Martin Pitt
I've followed Julian's work for a long time now. I fully trust his very capable skills in the world of apt and related packages, and he is very enthusiastic and engaged to fix things in Ubuntu as well. He also knows about our release process and freezes and coordinates updates accordingly. I fully support and recommend granting PPU rights -- in fact, I also fully support him becoming a full core developer.
TEMPLATE
== <SPONSORS NAME> == === General feedback === ## Please fill us in on your shared experience. (How many packages did you sponsor? How would you judge the quality? How would you describe the improvements? Do you trust the applicant?) === Specific Experiences of working together === ''Please add good examples of your work together, but also cases that could have handled better.'' === Areas of Improvement ===
JulianAndresKlode/DeveloperApplication-CoreDev (last edited 2016-06-22 18:22:43 by juliank)