Bazaar sprint, day 1

Ok, so the first day of the sprint is over.
It started much earlier than I’m used to (9am sharp), and I believe we left around 7pm, mainly because we needed food (and beer) pretty badly.
Meeting everyone has been absolutely great, and people are just very friendly and helpful in all kinds of ways.
The hotel Canonical has put us in is overwhelmingly nice, the offices have a very friendy environment, and the view of London is priceless.

A lot of brainstorming was done today, and we tried to start from the top by dumping all the adoptions blockers we perceive, and prioritizing them by importance.
Then we split up into two groups to discuss two major blockers, IDE Integration and Network Performance.

Both discussions seemed to be quite productive and triggered more than a few patches sent to be merged.

For a general sum up of the day, the IDE Integration meeting basically went around adding XML output to bzr’s core (it’s already available as a plugin) , as it seems to be the best language-agnostic approach. Some discussion about performance was delayed to a further discussion.

The network performance details escape me a bit, but the general idea was that the smart protocol has much room to improve, and it didn’t seem to need a terrible amount of work, it just needs to be done.

And finally, unifying under one storage format was heavily discussed, with a few approaches available which would reduce disk space and improve performance quite a bit.

Not sure if it’s of any use to anyone not present, but here are the pictures Aaron Bentley took of the whiteboards:

bazaar london sprint whiteboard
Adoption blockers brainstorm

bazaar london sprint whiteboard
After we voted on what was the most important issues to us

bazaar london sprint whiteboard
Adoption blockers continued

bazaar london sprint whiteboard
Network performance issues

bazaar london sprint whiteboard
IDE’s Integration

6 responses to “Bazaar sprint, day 1”

  1. Martin, can you say please what’s written about Windows on 3rd photo in the section “package availability”?


  2. Alexander:

    It’s “Two roads for Windows”, which, if I remember correctly, is about there being two different installers.


  3. and what people proposed for this “problem”? they actually think it’s the problem? heh.

    TortoiseBzr — is the problem.


  4. Alexander:

    I’m not sure any proposition was put forward. Just that it might be confusing to new users.

    TortoiseBzr was mentioned multiple times as a priority, and it seems there will be someone working on it.


  5. I have recent story about two installers for Windows. The funniest part it’s about my ex co-worker. He is hardcore Linux guy and installed bzr on Windows XP (I think first time at all, I’m installing new releases of bzr for him on Linux myself). He don’t ask me anything about better or recommended way for installing on Windows. Then he asked me why sftp transport did not work for him. Very funny.

    In short:
    1) he decide to install python-based variant because he fears warning about incompatibility of gui plugins, but in fact he don’t need any gui plugins
    2) he installed pycrypto from tar.gz without compiler, and `python install` blame about error and he even don’t mind about this as a problem.

    So, if newbie is really dummy or say idiot, it’s inevitable.


  6. Daniel Watkins Avatar
    Daniel Watkins


    The writeups of most of the brainstorming sessions are at



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 )

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: