FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:07 PM
"Dustin Kirkland"
 
Default New Application processes

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Daniel Holbach
<daniel.holbach@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> We feel that these changes are going to be a notable improvement and we
> would like to hear your thoughts on them, so we can move to the new
> format real soon now.

Hi Daniel (and MOTU Council)-

Thank you very much for addressing these concerns and putting forth
some suggested changes.

I think what you are suggesting is quite good. Open IRC meetings
every 2 weeks to vote on applications in real time, wiki-based
applications -- that's great.

I mentioned this previously in the 2-hour MOTU plenary session at UDS.
I will again present a controversial suggestion...

I really believe the MOTU and Core-Dev application processes would
greatly benefit from some minimal, objective criteria. It should be
perfectly clear that meeting these objective criteria will not be
sufficient, alone, to achieve MOTU/Core-Dev. However, I think there
absolutely must be something more objective for an aspiring
MOTU/CoreDev to achieve before taking the time/effort to apply.

At UDS, the argument was, "you should apply when your sponsors think
you're ready." I agree with that, however, that's just not enough...
Different sponsors have quite different thresholds and criteria.

A chief concern with my MOTU application was that I had not touched
enough Universe packages. Not to pick on Michael, but his Core Dev
application is currently blocking on the issue that he hasn't been
MOTU for "long enough". I'm sure there are other examples of
applicants, who, like Michael and I, were encouraged by all of our
sponsors to apply, but were met with somewhat arbitrary arguments of
not having done enough XYZ in Ubuntu yet...

I suggest setting some guideline criteria for both MOTU and Core Dev,
in terms of:
* minimum number of sponsored uploads fixing bugs (Main & Universe)
* minimum number of package merges (Main & Universe)
* minimum number of new packages (Main & Universe)
* time spent as an active member of (Ubuntu, Contributing Developer, MOTU, etc)
* perhaps others?

Again, I reiterate, that the absolute number of each of these should
not be sufficient or automatic for attaining privileges. Clearly some
bugs/merges/packages are much harder/easier than others.

But, please, please, please let's add some minority element of
objectivity to the processes.

:-Dustin

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:07 PM
"Dustin Kirkland"
 
Default New Application processes

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Daniel Holbach
<daniel.holbach@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> We feel that these changes are going to be a notable improvement and we
> would like to hear your thoughts on them, so we can move to the new
> format real soon now.

Hi Daniel (and MOTU Council)-

Thank you very much for addressing these concerns and putting forth
some suggested changes.

I think what you are suggesting is quite good. Open IRC meetings
every 2 weeks to vote on applications in real time, wiki-based
applications -- that's great.

I mentioned this previously in the 2-hour MOTU plenary session at UDS.
I will again present a controversial suggestion...

I really believe the MOTU and Core-Dev application processes would
greatly benefit from some minimal, objective criteria. It should be
perfectly clear that meeting these objective criteria will not be
sufficient, alone, to achieve MOTU/Core-Dev. However, I think there
absolutely must be something more objective for an aspiring
MOTU/CoreDev to achieve before taking the time/effort to apply.

At UDS, the argument was, "you should apply when your sponsors think
you're ready." I agree with that, however, that's just not enough...
Different sponsors have quite different thresholds and criteria.

A chief concern with my MOTU application was that I had not touched
enough Universe packages. Not to pick on Michael, but his Core Dev
application is currently blocking on the issue that he hasn't been
MOTU for "long enough". I'm sure there are other examples of
applicants, who, like Michael and I, were encouraged by all of our
sponsors to apply, but were met with somewhat arbitrary arguments of
not having done enough XYZ in Ubuntu yet...

I suggest setting some guideline criteria for both MOTU and Core Dev,
in terms of:
* minimum number of sponsored uploads fixing bugs (Main & Universe)
* minimum number of package merges (Main & Universe)
* minimum number of new packages (Main & Universe)
* time spent as an active member of (Ubuntu, Contributing Developer, MOTU, etc)
* perhaps others?

Again, I reiterate, that the absolute number of each of these should
not be sufficient or automatic for attaining privileges. Clearly some
bugs/merges/packages are much harder/easier than others.

But, please, please, please let's add some minority element of
objectivity to the processes.

:-Dustin

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:14 PM
Adilson Oliveira
 
Default New Application processes

Em 07-01-2009 16:07, Dustin Kirkland escreveu:

>
> But, please, please, please let's add some minority element of
> objectivity to the processes.
>

+1

That was my first complain when I first tried be a Motu (which I failed)
and never bothered to try again because of that and different sponsors
meant different standards but that's another complain Just want to
support your claim.

[]s

Adilson.

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:14 PM
Adilson Oliveira
 
Default New Application processes

Em 07-01-2009 16:07, Dustin Kirkland escreveu:

>
> But, please, please, please let's add some minority element of
> objectivity to the processes.
>

+1

That was my first complain when I first tried be a Motu (which I failed)
and never bothered to try again because of that and different sponsors
meant different standards but that's another complain Just want to
support your claim.

[]s

Adilson.

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:22 PM
Daniel Holbach
 
Default New Application processes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dustin Kirkland schrieb:
> I really believe the MOTU and Core-Dev application processes would
> greatly benefit from some minimal, objective criteria. It should be
> perfectly clear that meeting these objective criteria will not be
> sufficient, alone, to achieve MOTU/Core-Dev. However, I think there
> absolutely must be something more objective for an aspiring
> MOTU/CoreDev to achieve before taking the time/effort to apply.

Please let's have a separate discussion about the criteria, requirements
and expectations of new Ubuntu developers. The proposal the MOTU Council
put on the table is only about how we deal with applications that come in.

Thanks in advance,
Daniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAklk8twACgkQRjrlnQWd1esMmgCfdMiE2LWfcG KFHeLpCXmd+ra/
mW8Anim5Jw6c9NkuPLvrS8FD4US8qRZk
=gNxy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:22 PM
Daniel Holbach
 
Default New Application processes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dustin Kirkland schrieb:
> I really believe the MOTU and Core-Dev application processes would
> greatly benefit from some minimal, objective criteria. It should be
> perfectly clear that meeting these objective criteria will not be
> sufficient, alone, to achieve MOTU/Core-Dev. However, I think there
> absolutely must be something more objective for an aspiring
> MOTU/CoreDev to achieve before taking the time/effort to apply.

Please let's have a separate discussion about the criteria, requirements
and expectations of new Ubuntu developers. The proposal the MOTU Council
put on the table is only about how we deal with applications that come in.

Thanks in advance,
Daniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAklk8twACgkQRjrlnQWd1esMmgCfdMiE2LWfcG KFHeLpCXmd+ra/
mW8Anim5Jw6c9NkuPLvrS8FD4US8qRZk
=gNxy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 
Old 01-07-2009, 06:24 PM
Scott Kitterman
 
Default New Application processes

On Wednesday 07 January 2009 12:14, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> 3) Use the wiki
> Applications and endorsements shall be drafted on wiki pages, and
> presented for review when complete. This will give you the chance to use
> a template for the application, where we can make sure that most areas
> for the application are well-covered.

I would prefer that sponsors still send in their comments via mail. I think
that makes it clearer where the application stops and the sponsors words
start. Emails can (and should) be signed too.

Scott K

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-07-2009, 06:24 PM
Scott Kitterman
 
Default New Application processes

On Wednesday 07 January 2009 12:14, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> 3) Use the wiki
> Applications and endorsements shall be drafted on wiki pages, and
> presented for review when complete. This will give you the chance to use
> a template for the application, where we can make sure that most areas
> for the application are well-covered.

I would prefer that sponsors still send in their comments via mail. I think
that makes it clearer where the application stops and the sponsors words
start. Emails can (and should) be signed too.

Scott K

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 
Old 01-08-2009, 02:30 AM
Richard Johnson
 
Default New Application processes

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 12:07:35PM -0600, Dustin Kirkland wrote:
[...]
> A chief concern with my MOTU application was that I had not touched
> enough Universe packages. Not to pick on Michael, but his Core Dev
> application is currently blocking on the issue that he hasn't been
> MOTU for "long enough". I'm sure there are other examples of
> applicants, who, like Michael and I, were encouraged by all of our
> sponsors to apply, but were met with somewhat arbitrary arguments of
> not having done enough XYZ in Ubuntu yet...

Just to make it clear, the only thing blocking on Michael's application
at this time, are further comments from his other sponsors that have yet
replied to his application. After that, then the MC will vote on his
application. Just because a couple of people had concerns, doesn't mean
his application is blocked. Just a clarification.

To the rest of the comments that were made on the topic of the "New
Application Process":

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#CoreDev

There is a brief description of what is required prior to applying for
Core Developer. I think a majority of the time, the people who are
applying to be a core-dev, a majority of us know who that person is, how
that person is in the community, and what we can expect from that
person. We utilize the sponsor comments and other stuff in their
application just in case one of the voting members is unfamiliar with
that person for various reasons.

I am definitely fond of some of the Debian questions. The questions that
were put on the bottom of our proposal was really used just to get some
generalized answers to gauge the applicant's personality a little,
especially if we have never met that person in person, or if one of the
voters isn't familiar with that person.

I really love the feedback we are getting thus far, and I look forward
to more, where we can tweak the proposal and eventually turn it into
something golden

--
Richard JOHNSON
Developer, http://www.kubuntu.org
nixternal@kubuntu.org
GPG: 2E2C0124
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 01-08-2009, 02:30 AM
Richard Johnson
 
Default New Application processes

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 12:07:35PM -0600, Dustin Kirkland wrote:
[...]
> A chief concern with my MOTU application was that I had not touched
> enough Universe packages. Not to pick on Michael, but his Core Dev
> application is currently blocking on the issue that he hasn't been
> MOTU for "long enough". I'm sure there are other examples of
> applicants, who, like Michael and I, were encouraged by all of our
> sponsors to apply, but were met with somewhat arbitrary arguments of
> not having done enough XYZ in Ubuntu yet...

Just to make it clear, the only thing blocking on Michael's application
at this time, are further comments from his other sponsors that have yet
replied to his application. After that, then the MC will vote on his
application. Just because a couple of people had concerns, doesn't mean
his application is blocked. Just a clarification.

To the rest of the comments that were made on the topic of the "New
Application Process":

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#CoreDev

There is a brief description of what is required prior to applying for
Core Developer. I think a majority of the time, the people who are
applying to be a core-dev, a majority of us know who that person is, how
that person is in the community, and what we can expect from that
person. We utilize the sponsor comments and other stuff in their
application just in case one of the voting members is unfamiliar with
that person for various reasons.

I am definitely fond of some of the Debian questions. The questions that
were put on the bottom of our proposal was really used just to get some
generalized answers to gauge the applicant's personality a little,
especially if we have never met that person in person, or if one of the
voters isn't familiar with that person.

I really love the feedback we are getting thus far, and I look forward
to more, where we can tweak the proposal and eventually turn it into
something golden

--
Richard JOHNSON
Developer, http://www.kubuntu.org
nixternal@kubuntu.org
GPG: 2E2C0124
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:11 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org