Comment 3 for bug 539705

I think we need to have two categories of SLA here:
  1. One focused on the Ubuntu platform, e.g. A rollout of Launchpad should never break Canonical-supported packages in Canonical-supported releases of Ubuntu
  2. One focused on Canonical processes.

I quite like my example for point 1, and think we should make that our agreement.

I don't have a good idea for point 2, partly because there's so much fragmentation in launchpadlib-based developer tools. My guess is that it should be something like "if you rely on the production server, you won't get burned".

There's also a third kind of thing, I think. James Westby's package branch uploader is critical to the Ubuntu development process, but I see it as being a part of Launchpad itself. It's just a part that's written with launchpadlib and maintained in a separate tree. I'm willing to be convinced that it's a special case of 2 though.

In terms of concrete actions, here are my recommendations:
  * Diogo should go ahead and figure out a way of guaranteeing apport with an eye to providing a more general process.
  * If there are no objections, I'll put the SLA for #1 on the dev wiki, blog about it, email ubuntu-devel yada yada yada
  * I'll talk to U1 folk, see if they've got the same problem and if so how we can share solutions

jml