mg's temporary blog

UDS Karmic – Day One

Posted in Uncategorized by muratgunes on May 26, 2009

I’m in Barcelona to attend the Ubuntu Developer Summit for Karmic Koala, thanks to the kind sponsorship of Canonical, and I thought I’d use the last bit of  energy I have left from the first day to post short summaries of the sessions I attended.

Increasing Apport Coverage

This QA session was about increasing the coverage of the Apport automated bug reporting tool. One obvious way to do this will be to increase the amount of packages with Apport package hooks, so the QA team will lead a drive to do exactly that. The target will be to make sure that packages to which a sampling (likely by a 50% reduction) of the last 1000 bugs  filed belong have hooks by the next release. The #1 blocker leading to the current situation where we have few packages with hooks was identified to be the fact that few people know that the feature exists at all or is useful to the extent that it actually is. Assuming that there’s a free time slot, a plenary tutorial will be held about this in an effort to remind attending developers and QA people of this relatively simple yet rather important task.

Design and Usability Clinic

This was a hands-on session where the Canonical Design and User Experience Team offered aid to people who needed design/UX advice for their projects in a “clinic” setting. After about quarter an hour of introductions and roundtable talk, the attendees divided up into several groups discussing usability issues in their respective projects. A nice and apparently improvised byproduct was the permanent “UX Clinic” table that got set up in the lounge, around which similar discussions went on intermittently in the rest of the day.

Specialization Within Bug Control

Having more specialist members on the Ubuntu Bug Control team has been a recurring wish. This session focused on the new mentoring program aimed at getting more specialist (and otherwise) people from the Bug Squad into the Bug Control team. Christophe Sauthier and Emmet Hikory from the MOTU team were present to share their experiences with the mentoring model at length, which was beneficial.

Meet Your Users

This design/UX session revolved around (I choose the term advisedly) the theme of “personas”, that is, hypothetical audience stereotypes whom Ubuntu should be designed for. The premise Ivanka Majic, the session lead, put forward was that basing design decisions on the requirements of the more “peripheral” users in terms of association and attachment to Ubuntu and free software would both cover various specialist bases, and ensure that the more central area which has requirements that are more homogeneous and already better catered for would be covered as well.

Attendees suggested various stereotypes along the lines of  “students”, “children”, “administrators” and “media producers” on post-it notes, part of which were later evaluated on scales according to criteria such as age, social status, influence level, cultural background, so on.

My only gripe with this session was paradoxically also the major highlight of it: the talk seemed to stay hung up in the air, with no real conclusion or points to act from (the Gobby server failing and the consequent lack of collective notes certainly didn’t help). Of course this was the start of what we hopefully all expect to be a long conversation; the abrupt interruption of time running out only underlined the hunger I felt, and felt that others also felt, for more in-depth discussion of the audience factor in free software design and usability, and that in itself is promising, given that it’s actually gaining traction in Ubuntu now. Had Troy Sobotka, who has been an outspoken, if unforgiving, proponent of audience-aligned design in free software attended, he might have burst into tears of joy.

Finding Tasks For New Developers

Daniel Holbach this session, which focused on coming up with new means of offering “bitesize” work to new contributors to Ubuntu, mainly in the development area, which would further lower the barriers of entry and attract different sets of would-be contributors.

Tagged with: ,

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. ara said, on May 27, 2009 at 11:39 am

    I have to correct the 100 packages with apport hooks :-)
    Obviously, it is not 100 packages (too many!!) what we said is that looking at the last 100 bugs reported, and then grouped by package, take the 50% top of those packages order by number of bugs.

    Nevertheless, if you want to add hooks to 100 packages for next release, your more than welcome ;-)

    • muratgunes said, on May 27, 2009 at 5:44 pm

      Thanks for the correction. I recall that Brian presented the option of either the top 100 packages, or a list of packages to be decided upon according to the the last 1000 (not 100) bugs; I thought the first had been decided upon. We’re probably both wrong, on different points.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: