I have been watching GNOME’s testing story get better and better for a long time. The progress we made since we first started discussing the GNOME OS initiative is really impressive, even when you realize that GUADEC in A Coruña took place nine years ago. We got nightly OS images, Gitlab CI and the gnome-build-meta BuildStream project, not to mention Flatpak and Flathub.
Now we have another step forwards with the introduction of OpenQA testing for the GNOME OS images. Take a look at the announcement on GNOME Discourse to find out more about it.
Automated testing is quite tedious and time consuming to set up, and there is significant effort behind this – from chasing regressions that broke the installer build, and debugging VM boot failures to creating a set of simple, reliable tests and integrating OpenQA with Gitlab CI. A big thanks to Codethink for sponsoring the time we are spending on setting this up. It is part of a wider story aiming to facilitate better cooperation upstream between companies and open source projects, which I wrote about in this Codethink article “Higher quality of FOSS”.
It’s going to take time to figure out how to get the most out of OpenQA, but I’m sure it’s going to bring GNOME some big benefits.
We were lucky to have several promising candidates. I want to shout out Nitin in particular for getting really involved with Tracker and making some solid contributions too. I want to remind all GSoC applicants of two things. Firstly that a track record of high quality open source contributions is something very valuable and always an advantage when applying for jobs and internships. Including next year’s GSoC 🙂 And secondly that if 5 folk propose the same project idea, only one can be chosen, but if 5 different project ideas arrive then we may be able to choose two or even three of them.
I also want to highlight the great work Daniele Nicolodi has been doing recently on the database side of Tracker. If you want a SPARQL 1.1 database and don’t want to go EnterpriseTM Scale, your options are surprisingly limited, and one goal of the Tracker 3 work was to make libtracker-sparql into a standalone database option. Daniele has moved this forward, already getting it running on Mac OS X and cleaning up a number of neglected internal codepaths.
I hope the increased involvement shows our developer experience improvements are starting to pay dividends. More eyes on the code that powers search in GNOME is always a good thing.
2020 was a year full of surprises, so surprise that I finished it by returning to work in the same job that I left exactly 3 years ago.
There are a few reasons I did that! I will someday blog in more detail about working as a language teacher. It’s a fun job but to make the most of it you have to move around regularly, and I unexpectedly found a reason to settle in Santiago. Codethink kindly agreed that I could join the ongoing remote-work revolution and work from here.
Three years is a long time. What changed since I left? There’s a much bigger and nicer office in Manchester, with nobody in it due to the pandemic. The company is now grouped into 4 internal divisions. This is still an experiment and it adds some management overhead, also helps to maintain a feeling of autonomy in a company that’s now almost 100 people. (When I started there ten years ago, I think there were seventeen employees?!)
I also want to mention some research projects that my colleagues are working on. Codethink is a services company, but has always funded some non-customer work including in the past work on dconf, Baserock, Buildstream and the Freedesktop SDK. These are termed ‘internal investments’ but they are far from internal, the goal is always to contribute to open software and hardware projects. The process for deciding where to invest has improved somewhat in my absence; it still requires some business case for the investment (I’m still thinking how to propose that I get paid to work on music recommendations and desktop search tools all day), but there is now a process!
Here are two things that are being worked on now:
My contribution to Codethink’s RISC-V research was writing an article about it. The tl;dr is we are playing with some RISC-V boards, mainly in the context of Freedesktop SDK. Since writing that article the team tracked down a thorny bug in how qemu-user uses GLib that had been blocking progress, and got GNOME OS running in qemu-system-riscv. Expect to see a video soon. You can thank us when you get your first RISC-V laptop 🙂
I never worked on a medical device but some of my colleagues have, and this led to the Bloodlight project. It’s an open hardware device for measuring your heart rate, aiming to avoid some pitfalls that existing devices fall into:
Existing technology used in smart watches suffers various shortcomings, such as reduced effectiveness on darker skin tones and tattoos.
GNOME is lucky to have a healthy mix of paid and volunteer contributors. Today’s post looks at how we can keep it that way.
I had some time free last summer and worked on something that crossed a number of project boundries. It was a fun experience. I also experienced how it feels to volunteer time on a merge request which gets ignored. That’s not a fun experience, it’s rather demotivating, and it got me thinking: how many people have had the same experience, and not come back?
I wrote a script with the Gitlab API to find open merge requests with no feedback, and I found a lot of them. I started to think we might have a problem.
Code Reviews are Whose Job?
I’ve never seen a clear breakdown within GNOME of who is responsible for what. That’s understandable: we’re an open, community-powered project and things change fast. Even so, we have too much tribal knowledge and newcomers may arrive with expectations that don’t match reality.
Each component of GNOME lists one or more maintainers, In principle the maintainers review new contributions. Many GNOME maintainers volunteer their time, though. If they aren’t keeping up with review, nobody can force them to abandon their lives and spend more time reviewing patches, nor should they; so the solution to this problem can’t be “force maintainers to do X”.
Can we crowdsource a solution instead? Back in 2020 I proposed posting a weekly list of merge requests that need attention. There was a lot of positive feedback so I’ve continued doing this, and now mostly automated the process.
So far a handful of MRs have been merged as a result. The list is limited to MRs marked as “first contribution”, which happens when the submitter doesn’t have anything merged in the relevant project yet. So each success may have a high impact, and hopefully sends a signal that GNOME values your contributions!
Who can merge things, though?
Back to tribal knowledge, because now we have a new problem. If I’m not the maintainer of package X, can I review and merge patches? Should I?
If you are granted a GNOME account, you get ‘developer’ permission to the gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME group. This means you can commit and merge in every component, and this is deliberate:
The reason why we have a shared GNOME group, with the ability to review/merge changes in every GNOME project, is to encourage drive by reviews and contributions. It allows projects to continue improving without blocking on a single person.
Those listed as module maintainers have extra permissions (you can see a comparison between Gitlab’s ‘developer’ and ‘maintainer’ roles here).
On many active projects the culture is that only a few people, usually the maintainers, actually review and merge changes. There are very good reasons for this. Those who regularly dedicate time to keeping the project going should have the final say on how it works, or their role becomes impossible.
Is this documented anywhere? It depends on the project. GTK is a good example, with a clear CONTRIBUTING.md file and list of CODEOWNERS too. GTK isn’t my focus here, though: it does have a (small) team of active maintainers, and patches from newcomers do get reviewed.
I’m more interested in smaller projects which may not have an active maintainer, nor a documented procedure for contributors. How do we stop patches being lost? How do you become a maintainer of an inactive project? More tribal knowledge, unfortunately.
Where do we go from here?
To recap, my goal is that new contributors feel welcome to GNOME, by having a timely response to their contributions. This may be as simple as a comment on the merge request saying “Thanks, I don’t quite know what to do with this.” It’s not ideal, but it’s a big step forwards for the newcomer who was, up til now, being ignored completely. In some cases, the request isn’t even in the right place — translation fixes go to a separate Gitlab project, for example — it’s easy to help in these cases. That’s more or less where we’re at with the weekly review-request posts.
We still need to figure out what to do with merge requests we get which look correct, but it’s not immediately obvious if they can be merged.
I started thinking about playlist generation software about 15 years ago. In that time, so much happened that I can’t possibly summarize it all here. I’ll just mention two things. Firstly, Spotify appeared, and proceeded to hire or buy most of the world’s music recommendation experts and make automatic playlists into a commodity. Secondly, I spent a lot of time iterating on a music tool I call Calliope.
Spotify or not?
Spotify’s discovery features can be a great way to find new music, but I’ve always felt like something was missing. The recommendations are opaque. We know broadly how they work, but there’s no way to know why it’s suggesting I listen to ska punk all day, or I try a podcast titled ‘Tu Inglés’, or play some 80’s alternative classics I’m already familiar with. It gets repetitive.
Some of the most original new music isn’t even available on Spotify. Most folk don’t release that small artists have to pay a distributor to get their music to appear on streaming services like Spotify and Apple Music, a dubious investment when the return for the artist might be a cheque for $0.10 and a little exposure. No wonder that some artists use music purchase sites like Bandcamp exclusively. Of course, this means they’ll never appear in your Discover Weekly playlist.
Algorithms decide which social media posts I see, whether I can get a credit card, and how much I would pay to insure a car. Spotify’s recommendation system is another closed system like the others. But unlike credit agencies and big social networks, the world of music has some very successful repositories of open data. I’ve been saving my listen history to Last.fm since 2006. Shouldn’t I do something with it?
Calliope is an open source tool for hackers who want to generate playlists. Its primary goals are to be a fun side project for me and to produce interesting playlists from of my digital music collection. Recently it has begun fulfilling both of those goals so I decided it’s time to share some details.
The project consists of a set of commandline tools which operate on playlist data. You use a shell pipeline to define the data pipeline. Your local music collection is queried from Tracker or Beets. You can mix in data from Last.fm, Musicbrainz and Spotify. You can output the results as XSPF playlists in your music player. The implementation is Python, but the commandline focus means it can interact with tools in any language that parses JSON.
The goal is not to replace Spotify here. The goal is to make recommendations open and transparent. That means you’re going to see the details of how they work. My dream would be that this becomes an educational tool to help us understand more about what “algorithms” (used in the journalistic sense) actually do.
I’m developing a series of example playlist generation scripts. I’m particularly enjoying “Music I haven’t listened to in over a year” — that one requires over a year of listen history data to be useful, of course. But even the “One hour random shuffle” playlist is fun.
A breakthrough this month was the start of a constraints-based approach for selecting songs. I found a useful model in a paper from 2006 titled “Fast Generation of Optimal Music Playlists using Local Search”, and implemented a subset using the Python simpleai library. Simple things can produce great results. I’m only scratching the surface of what’s possible with this model, using constraints on the duration property to ensure songs and playlists are a suitable length. I expect to show off some more sophisticated examples in future.
I’m not going to talk much more about it here — if it sounds interesting, read the documentation which I’ve recently been working on, clone the source code, and ask me if there’s any questions. I’m keen to hear what ideas you have.
This is part 1 of a series. Come back next week to find out more about the changes in Tracker 3.0.
It’s too early to say “Job done”. But we’ve passed the biggest milestone on the project we announced last year: version 3.0 of Tracker is released and the rollout has begun!
We wanted to port all the core GNOME apps in a single release, and we almost achieved this ambitious goal. Nautilus, Boxes, Music, Rygel and Totem all now use Tracker 3. Photos will require 2.x until the next release. Outside of GNOME core, some apps are ported and some are not, so we are currently in a transitional period.
The important thing is only Tracker Miner FS 3 needs to run by default. Tracker Miner FS is the filesystem indexer which allows apps to do instant search and content discovery.
Since Photos 3.38 still uses Tracker 2.x we have modified it to start Tracker Miner FS 2 along with the app. This means the filesystem index in the central Tracker 2 database is kept up-to-date while Photos is running. This will increase resource usage, but only while you are using Photos. Other apps which are not yet ported may want to use the same method while they finish porting to Tracker 3 — see Photos merge request 142 to see how it’s done.
Flatpak apps can safely use Tracker Miner FS 3 on the host, via Tracker’s new portal which guards access to your data based on the type of content. It’s up to the app developer whether they use the system Tracker Miner service, or whether they run another instance inside the sandbox. There are upsides and downsides to both approaches.
We all owe thanks to Carlos for his huge effort re-thinking and re-implementing the core of Tracker. We should also thank Red Hat for sponsoring some of this work.
I also want to thank all the maintainers who collaborated with us. Marinus and Jean were early adopters in GNOME Music and gave valuable feedback including coming to the regular meetings, along with Jens who also ported Rygel early in the cycle. Bastien dug into reviewing the tracker3 grilo plugin, and made some big improvements for building Tracker Miners inside a Flatpak. In Nautilus, Ondrej and Antonio did some heroic last minute review of my branch and together we reworked the Starred Files feature to fix somelongstandingissues.
The new GNOME VM images were really useful for testing and catching issues early. The chat room is very responsive and friendly, Abderrahim, Jordan and Valentin all helped me a lot to get a working VM with Tracker 3.
GNOME’s release team were also responsive and helpful, right up to the last minute freeze break request which was crucial to avoiding a “Tracker Miner FS 2 and 3 running in parallel” scenario.
Thanks also to GNOME’s translation teams for keeping up with all the string changes in the CLI tool, and to distro packagers who are now working to make Tracker 3 available to you.
Coming soon to your distro.
It takes time for a new GNOME release to reach users, because most distros have their own testing phase.
We can use Repology to see where Tracker 3 is available. Note that some distros package it in a new tracker3 package while others update the existing tracker package.
Let’s see both:
I have a lot more to write about following the Tracker 3.0 release. I’ll be publishing a series of blog posts over the next month. Make sure you subscribe to my blog or to Planet GNOME to see them all!
I like reading stuff on twitter.com because a lot of interesting people write things there which they don’t write anywhere else.
But Twitter is designed to be addictive, and a key mechanism they use is the “infinite scroll” design. Infinite scroll has been called the Web’s slot machine because of the way it exploits our minds to make us keep reading. It’s an unethical design.
… infinite scroll has no clear benefit for users. It exists almost entirely to circumvent self-control.
Hopefully Twitter will one day consider the ethics of their design. Until then, I made a Firefox extension to remove the infinite scroll feature and replace it with a ‘Load older tweets’ link at the bottom of the page, like this:
GUADEC 2017 is just over three months away, which is a very long time in the future and leaves lots of time to organise everything (at least that’s what I keep telling myself).
However, the call for papers is closing this Sunday so if you have something you want to talk about in front of the GNOME community and you haven’t already submitted a talk then please head to the registration site and do so!
Once the call for papers closes, the Papers Committee will fetch their ceremonial robes and make their way to a cave deep in the Peak District for two weeks. There they will drink fresh spring water, hunt grouse on the moors and study your talk submissions in great detail. When two weeks is up, their votes are communicated back to Manchester using smoke signals and by Sunday 7th May you’ll be notified by email if your talk was accepted. From there we can organise travel sponsorship and finalize the schedule of the first 3 days of the conference, which should be available late next month.
We’ll put a separate call out for BoF sessions, workshops, and tutorial sessions to take place during the second half of GUADEC — the 23rd April deadline only applies to talks.
At this year’s GUADEC in Manchester we have rooms available for you right at the venue in lovely modern student townhouses. As I write this there are still some available to book along with your registration. In a couple of days we have to give final numbers to the University for how many rooms we want, so it would help us out if all the folk who want a room there could register and book one now if you haven’t already done so! We’ll have some available for later booking but we have to pay up front for them now so we can’t reserve too many.
Rooms for sponsored attendees are reserved separately so you don’t need to book now if your attendance depends on travel sponsorship.
If you are looking for a hotel, we have a hotel booking service run by Visit Manchester where you can get the best rates from various hotels right up til June 2017. (If you need to arrive before Thursday 27th July then you can to contact Visit Manchester directly for your booking at firstname.lastname@example.org).
We have had some great talk submissions already but there is room for plenty more, so make sure you also submit your idea for a talk before 23rd April!
The GUADEC 2017 team is happy to officially announce the dates and location of this year’s conference.
GUADEC 2017 will run from Friday 28th July to Wednesday 2nd August. The first three days will include talks and social events, as well as the GNOME Foundation’s AGM. This part of the conference will also include a 20th anniversary celebration for the GNOME project.
The second 3 days (from Monday 31st July to Wednesday 2nd August) are unconference-style and will include space for hacking, project BoF sessions and possibly training workshops.
The conference days will be at Manchester Metropolitan University’s Brooks Building. The unconference days will be in a nearby University building named The Shed.
We are hosting a party for the new GNOME release this Friday (23rd September).
The venue is MADLab in Manchester city centre (here’s a map). We will be there between 18:00 and 21:00. There will be some free refreshments, an overview of the new features in 3.22, advice on how install a free desktop OS on your computer and how contribute to GNOME or a related Free Software project.
Everyone is welcome, including users of rival desktop environments & operating systems 🙂
We are looking for people who can write code, who match one of these job descriptions at least slightly, and who are willing to relocate to Manchester, UK (so you must either be an EU resident, or able to get a work permit for the UK.) Manchester is number 8 in Lonely Planet’s Best In Travel list for 2016, so really you’d be doing yourself a favour to move here. Remote working is possible if you have lots of contributions to public software projects that demonstrate your amazingness.
There is a nice symmetry to this blog post, I remember reading a similar one quite a few years ago, which led to me applying for a job at Codethink, and i’ve been here ever since, with various trips to exotic countries in between.
If you’re interested, send a CV & cover letter to email@example.com.