Application Review Request: harmonySEQ 0.15

[Rafał Cieślak]

    Application Review For harmonySEQ 0.15

    == About You ==

    * NAME: Rafał Cieślak
    * EMAIL ADDRESS: rafalcieslak256 <at> gmail.com

    The Application:

    * APPLICATION NAME: harmonySEQ
    * LICENSE: GNU GPL v3
    * PPA URL: https://launchpad.net/~rafalcieslak256/+archive/harmonyseq
    * SUPPORT RESOURCE http://answers.launchpad.net/harmonyseq, http://harmonyseq.wordpress.com/contact or email to rafalcieslak256 <at> gmail.com
    * KNOWN ISSUES: https://bugs.launchpad.net/harmonyseq

[Allison Randal (allison)]

Apologies for taking so long to review your submission, we've been going through a bit of a tools change-over. The Oneiric release of Ubuntu is coming up on Oct 13th, so all existing submissions to the ARB will need to update their submission. This involves retargeting your app to Oneiric, rather than Natty or Maverick. Particularly, in your PPA, you'll need to explicitly submit your package for Oneiric, with a changelog entry such as:

myapp (myapp_0.3.9-0extras11.11.1~oneiric1) oneiric; urgency=low

If we don't hear back from you by the next ARB meeting on Oct 25th, we'll assume you're no longer interested, or have taken one of the other avenues for getting your app into Ubuntu (like submission upstream through Debian), and will close this ticket. If you miss the deadline but still want to apply, you can always resubmit later through:

http://developer.ubuntu.com/publish/

Thanks for your submission, and for your interest in getting your app into Ubuntu!

[Rafał Cieślak (rafalcieslak256)]

Thanks for the reply anyway, and congratulations on opening this site!

As I'm still interested in getting the app into Ubuntu, I need to ask some question.

First concerns the Oneric package version in the PPA. It looks like your message was - at least partially - a copy send to other apps awainting for review, and I am not sure, whether the need to retarget the app to Ubuntu applies to harmonySEQ, because a version for Ubuntu Oneiric is already in the PPA. However, you ask for a specific version format, and mine differ from the one you request (it's like: 0.15-release~oneiric1). Does it mean I should re-upload the package for Oneiric providing another version format, or is it okay if my app is already targeted to Oneiric?

Next I'd like to ask about advantages of using this brand-new site. I've read I can find there some stats for my app, so I wonder if it wouldn't be better for me if I closed this ticked and re-submitted the app through the developer.ubuntu.com portal. I mean: will it be anyhow beneficial for me? Maybe, for example, this would allow me to easier re-request reviews for new app's version, or keep an eye on the downloads counter, etc.

Another question is about the deadline. The point is that I'm finishing the 0.16 version, but I have not a faint idea of whether I will release it before Oct 25th. If this date is deadline for apps to be included in repo for Ubuntu Oneiric, then, of course, I would like to get the current (0.15) version. But if this is deadline only for my answer, to check whether I'm still interested, and application reviews will be acceptable after Oct 25th, then I'd prefer not to waste your (and mine) time, and release only the upcoming 0.16 version. So, concluding, my question is whether I can request an app into Ubuntu Oneiric after Oct 25th.

Thanks for your help in getting hamonySEQ into Oneiric.

[Allison Randal (allison)]

The Oct 25 deadline is only for replying. You can submit an app for Oneiric anytime from October 13 to mid-April. It's fine to either submit 0.15 now and submit an update for 0.16 when it's ready, or to wait and submit 0.16. At the moment, you won't get benefits like app stats and re-reviews of new versions for an ARB app, but new features for the developer.ubuntu.com submission portal are coming soon, they might even be ready by the time you submit 0.16. If the new features aren't ready when you submit, then submitting a new ARB app through developer.ubuntu.com will just create a new ticket here, so there's no significant difference between the two.

In your PPA, your app does have an Oneiric version of the package, but if you look at the package details, you can see it was actually built for Natty:

harmonyseq (0.15-release~oneiric1) natty; urgency=low

The packages need to be built on Oneiric, to make sure they're compatible with the Oneiric versions of any dependencies or tools used in building it. So that's the reason for specifying 'oneiric' in the changelog line. Also, packages for the ARB do have a specific version format requirement, with "extras" and the Ubuntu release version number included. In your case, I'd expect the final version to be named:

harmonyseq (0.16-0extras11.10.1) oneiric; urgency=low

But, while you're releasing test packages for review, you'll probably want to name them something like:

harmonyseq (0.16-0extras11.10.1~oneiric1) oneiric; urgency=low

[Rafał Cieślak (rafalcieslak256)]

Thanks for prompt reply!

Will it be possible to somehow 'migrate' from here to the developer.ubuntu.com, keeping the apps I have released as mine, when these features will be ready? If a request from the site creates a ticked here, then will I be able to link an app to a ticket that already exist (this one)?

And about the versioning: great thanks for finally answering my question I couldn't find answer to for a very long time - now I understand what the release codenames in the changelog file actually mean! I'll see if I'll first release into Ubuntu the 0.15 version or the 0.16, that depends on how the progress on 0.16 will be. But about the version format: would it be okay if I released the 'extras11.10.1' version to a separate PPA, in order to avoid mess in the original archive?

[Allison Randal (allison)]

The information here won't be transferred to developer.ubuntu.com. So, there might be some advantage to submitting through MyApps now, but I can't guarantee the information will 'migrate' into the new features that will be added to MyApps. Pick whichever way is easiest for you. :)

Yes, you can submit the custom version number for Extras as a separate PPA. Or, send it to us as a source package, and we'll put it in the Extras staging PPA.

[Rafał Cieślak (rafalcieslak256)]

Would it be okay, if I released different harmonySEQ versions for general use and for including in Ubuntu?
I'd like to release harmonySEQ 0.16, and then adapt it to Ubuntu. That would mainly consist of changing all default files locations to /otp, and other related adjustments. That would obviously mean that the source/deb of harmonySEQ 0.16 which I will send you will DIFFER from the original release. Is that acceptable?

Also, I am not sure how will the desktop integration work when harmonySEQ will be installed to /opt. I am mostly worried about .desctop files, which are required to run harmonySEQ from the Dash. They should be put into /usr/share/applications directory, and I doubt whether the Dash will look for them in /opt/extras.ubuntu.com/harmonyseq/usr/share/applications. Or it will? Please explain me how the desktop integration work with the extras applications, and what should I do to ensure it will work as expected.

[Andrew Mitchell (ajmitch)]

There are exceptions for certain files like .desktop files, DBUS service files, etc which need to be in /usr to be useful. The simplest option going forward is likely to be a wrapper[0] which is used when packaging which moves files into /opt, but when the application is run it uses a unionfs overlay to make it appear as in /usr to the application. This also handles rewriting the .desktop file to use the wrapper.
I'll test out your application with this by the end of the weekend & see if the wrapper is suitable, or if it needs more work. If it does, then you shouldn't need to create a separate source just for Ubuntu.

[0] http://www.stgraber.org/2011/09/08/install-multiple-version-of-the-same-package-and-avoid-filesystem-conflicts/

[Andrew Mitchell (ajmitch)]

I was testing this application with the arb-wrapper mentioned previously, and found that it would not start with the following error:

ALSA lib seq_hw.c:457:(snd_seq_hw_open) open /dev/snd/seq failed: Permission denied
Failed to open ALSA sequencer.
harmonySEQ: seq.c:3109: snd_seq_create_queue: Assertion `seq && info' failed.
Aborted

This appears to be because the /dev/snd/seq device is only writable by members of the audio group, which the default user in Ubuntu is not part of. Have you added your user to that group at some point?

[Rafał Cieślak (rafalcieslak256)]

No. I did not add myself to audio group, and just have re-checked -
i'm not a member of it. Moreover, the application was tested and runs
successfully on many Ubuntu machines, both with default and custom
sound setup. It would seem then, that it's not problem with
permissions.

2011/10/31, Andrew Mitchell <email address hidden>:
> I was testing this application with the arb-wrapper mentioned
> previously, and found that it would not start with the following error:
>
> ALSA lib seq_hw.c:457:(snd_seq_hw_open) open /dev/snd/seq failed: Permission
> denied
> Failed to open ALSA sequencer.
> harmonySEQ: seq.c:3109: snd_seq_create_queue: Assertion `seq && info'
> failed.
> Aborted
>
> This appears to be because the /dev/snd/seq device is only writable by
> members of the audio group, which the default user in Ubuntu is not part
> of. Have you added your user to that group at some point?
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug
> report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/730196
>
> Title:
> Application Review Request: harmonySEQ 0.15
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-app-review-board/+bug/730196/+subscriptions
>

[Andrew Mitchell (ajmitch)]

OK, then it's likely a problem with how the unionfs fuse overlay is being used, I'll see if this can be worked around in arb-wrapper.

[Rafał Cieślak (rafalcieslak256)]

I'm closing this bug and soon will send a new request via MyApps portal for a newer harmonySEQ version.