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 Masters Of The Universe

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-23-2008, 02:54 PM
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

Stefan Potyra wrote:
> How about the following:
> 1) applicants reply in this thread
> 2) motu-sru does a preselection
> 3) we'll vote on the result

What is the benefit of 2) ? Can't the MOTU team do the selection in the voting?
If there's some people motu-sru would remove, I would hope for the MOTU team to
remove them too in the voting.

Cheers,
Emilio

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 05-23-2008, 03:31 PM
"Emmet Hikory"
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> What is the benefit of 2) ? Can't the MOTU team do the selection in the voting?
> If there's some people motu-sru would remove, I would hope for the MOTU team to
> remove them too in the voting.

The large benefit of allowing the existing members of motu-sru to
select amoung the volunteers is to ensure that the team works well
together. If there is a removal with which MOTU disagree, such
objection ought be raised in response to the motu-sru publication of
the candidates.

While I can't be entirely sure, I suspect there will be time
between the publication of the slate of candidates and MOTU Council
configuring the appropriate polls for selection.

--
Emmet HIKORY

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 05-23-2008, 04:53 PM
"Scott Kitterman"
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> What is the benefit of 2) ? Can't the MOTU team do the selection in the
>> voting?
>> If there's some people motu-sru would remove, I would hope for the MOTU
>> team to
>> remove them too in the voting.
>
> The large benefit of allowing the existing members of motu-sru to
> select amoung the volunteers is to ensure that the team works well
> together. If there is a removal with which MOTU disagree, such
> objection ought be raised in response to the motu-sru publication of
> the candidates.
>
> While I can't be entirely sure, I suspect there will be time
> between the publication of the slate of candidates and MOTU Council
> configuring the appropriate polls for selection.

I am strongly opposed to pre-selection. We have had cases in the past
where a non-transparent pre-selection process resulted in a very limited
and from the perspective of at least a significant slice of the community
very unsuitable set of choices.

As an organization consisting largely of volunteers, the legitimacy of our
management teams comes from the fact that MOTU have selected them. Once
there is a pre-selection, this legitimacy is lost. If someone volunteers
that might be problematic, I think that we should trust the MOTU to do the
right thing. Personally, I'm not at all opposed to MOTU discussing the
advantages and disadvantages of various candidates. That would, of
course, include the current motu-sru. I believe that whatever concerns
there may be that consider motu-sru to want pre-selection, I think that
with some constructive discussion as we move to a vote the can be managed
transparently in an effective way.

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 05-23-2008, 05:23 PM
Stefan Potyra
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

Hi,

Am Freitag 23 Mai 2008 18:53:25 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> > Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >> What is the benefit of 2) ? Can't the MOTU team do the selection in the
> >> voting?
> >> If there's some people motu-sru would remove, I would hope for the MOTU
> >> team to
> >> remove them too in the voting.
> >
> > The large benefit of allowing the existing members of motu-sru to
> > select amoung the volunteers is to ensure that the team works well
> > together. If there is a removal with which MOTU disagree, such
> > objection ought be raised in response to the motu-sru publication of
> > the candidates.

heh, yeah... and since my request is for additional members to an existing
team, I guess it's polite to ask them.

> >
> > While I can't be entirely sure, I suspect there will be time
> > between the publication of the slate of candidates and MOTU Council
> > configuring the appropriate polls for selection.
>
> I am strongly opposed to pre-selection. We have had cases in the past
> where a non-transparent pre-selection process resulted in a very limited
> and from the perspective of at least a significant slice of the community
> very unsuitable set of choices.

Ok, let me make s.th. clear: My proposal so far is aimed at *one* particular
goal. To get motu-sru back to full strength *now*.

It is *not* meant as a general policy for handling membership for motu
key-teams. As Emilio noted in the gobby document, we need a good general
policy, and I fully support this idea.

However for this particular case (and that's why I didn't write s.th. about a
MOTU vote in my initial mail), I just don't expect that there will be much to
discuss. So far, only Stephan volunteered (thanks!), so unless more people
will also volunteer, there won't be even much to vote about .

So maybe we can agree to the following:
- everyone volunteering to back up motu-sru please reply in this thread
- in one week (Friday, 30th of May), we'll see how many applicants we have
- and then we'll decide how to proceed, and if s.th. is worthwhile to vote on
(which I really don't expect so far, but I hope you all prove me wrong by
volunteering for motu-sru ).

And for the general discussion about membership in key teams: I'll start a new
thread about that, so please use that thread instead. (hah, so at least I
invented a new tongue twister *g*.)

Cheers,
Stefan.
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 05-25-2008, 07:04 PM
"Jordan Mantha"
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu@kitterman.com> wrote:

> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:

>> What is the benefit of 2) ? Can't the MOTU team do the selection in the

>> voting?

>> If there's some people motu-sru would remove, I would hope for the MOTU

>> team to

>> remove them too in the voting.

>

> * * The large benefit of allowing the existing members of motu-sru to

> select amoung the volunteers is to ensure that the team works well

> together. *If there is a removal with which MOTU disagree, such

> objection ought be raised in response to the motu-sru publication of

> the candidates.

>

> * * While I can't be entirely sure, I suspect there will be time

> between the publication of the slate of candidates and MOTU Council

> configuring the appropriate polls for selection.



I am strongly opposed to pre-selection. *We have had cases in the past

where a non-transparent pre-selection process resulted in a very limited

and from the perspective of at least a significant slice of the community

very unsuitable set of choices.


I'm also opposed to opaque membership processes, *however* I also think that current team members are in a good position (in most cases, IMO better than MOTU-at-large) to judge candidates. I personally think if MOTU are just going to pick random people because they've heard of them or something, then we're better off having MOTU SRU making pre-selections (not final selections).*

*
As an organization consisting largely of volunteers, the legitimacy of our

management teams comes from the fact that MOTU have selected them. *Once

there is a pre-selection, this legitimacy is lost. *If someone volunteers

that might be problematic, I think that we should trust the MOTU to do the

right thing. *Personally, I'm not at all opposed to MOTU discussing the

advantages and disadvantages of various candidates. *That would, of

course, include the current motu-sru. *I believe that whatever concerns

there may be that consider motu-sru to want pre-selection, I think that

with some constructive discussion as we move to a vote the can be managed

transparently in an effective way.

Well, I'm not sure if legitimacy is neccesarily lost. Some is I suppose is, but the team members are still MOTUs so the question is really whether a subset of MOTU should do some selection or whether the whole thing, top-to-bottom, should be handled by MOTU-at-large. Ideally I would like the entire MOTU team deciding teams but issues I see are:

* * many MOTU don't vote in the first place. I don't believe we've ever gotten over 50%. Most votes during MOTU Meetings are 4-8 people.
* * historically I don't see where we've been able to comprehensively vett people without devolving into a flamefest.

* * time consuming. Giving time for comments, time for nominatiions, time for voting, etc. can easily make the process of getting new members take at least 1 month.

Perhaps we can put some things in place to mitigate these issues.

/me crawls back under his rock.

-Jordan

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 05-26-2008, 09:55 AM
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

Jordan Mantha wrote:
> Well, I'm not sure if legitimacy is neccesarily lost. Some is I suppose
> is, but the team members are still MOTUs so the question is really
> whether a subset of MOTU should do some selection or whether the whole
> thing, top-to-bottom, should be handled by MOTU-at-large. Ideally I
> would like the entire MOTU team deciding teams but issues I see are:
> * many MOTU don't vote in the first place. I don't believe we've ever
> gotten over 50%. Most votes during MOTU Meetings are 4-8 people.

That's not comparable. In a meeting, you need to be present on it, and you have
about one minute or two to cast your vote. In this policy, you would have one
week for it.

> * historically I don't see where we've been able to comprehensively
> vett people without devolving into a flamefest.

Is this in favour or against MOTU doing the vote? If against, I can't see how
the SRU/Release teams doing a pre-selection (or IOW, vetoing some candidates)
helps, versus the MOTU team voting other people.

> * time consuming. Giving time for comments, time for nominatiions,
> time for voting, etc. can easily make the process of getting new members
> take at least 1 month.

If we set it for 1 week for nominations, and one week for votes, the process
would about two weeks, which sounds reasonable to me.

Cheers,
Emilio

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 05-26-2008, 05:24 PM
"Jordan Mantha"
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@ubuntu.com> wrote:

Jordan Mantha wrote:

> Well, I'm not sure if legitimacy is neccesarily lost. Some is I suppose

> is, but the team members are still MOTUs so the question is really

> whether a subset of MOTU should do some selection or whether the whole

> thing, top-to-bottom, should be handled by MOTU-at-large. Ideally I

> would like the entire MOTU team deciding teams but issues I see are:

> * * many MOTU don't vote in the first place. I don't believe we've ever

> gotten over 50%. Most votes during MOTU Meetings are 4-8 people.



That's not comparable. In a meeting, you need to be present on it, and you have

about one minute or two to cast your vote. In this policy, you would have one

week for it.


Which doesn't seem to draw all that many more people, considering how long people have, IMO. I'm not against having a week vote by all of MOTU per se, I'm just not sure that it's much more "legitimate" than having MOTU SRU put up nominations and then having a quick (1or 2 day) vote.

*

> * * historically I don't see where we've been able to comprehensively

> vett people without devolving into a flamefest.



Is this in favour or against MOTU doing the vote? If against, I can't see how

the SRU/Release teams doing a pre-selection (or IOW, vetoing some candidates)

helps, versus the MOTU team voting other people.


I'd much rather have MOTU SRU vetting candidates than nobody at all. If we (MOTU) can't vett (discuss qualifications, ask tough questions, etc.) people without it going sour perhaps it's better to let somebody else do it. If we can then fine. I'm just saying I see this as a potential issue.

*

> * * time consuming. Giving time for comments, time for nominatiions,

> time for voting, etc. can easily make the process of getting new members

> take at least 1 month.



If we set it for 1 week for nominations, and one week for votes, the process

would about two weeks, which sounds reasonable to me.*

That doesn't account for administrative delays, nominee discussions, etc. and two weeks doesn't seem like a short time to me. I want things done within a day or two. This may not be a feasible goal in the short term, but I really dislike long, drawn out processes that leave people "Pending" for extended periods.


-Jordan


--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 05-26-2008, 08:00 PM
Scott Kitterman
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

On Sunday 25 May 2008 15:04, Jordan Mantha wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu@kitterman.com>
>
> wrote:
> > > Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > >> What is the benefit of 2) ? Can't the MOTU team do the selection in
> > >> the voting?
> > >> If there's some people motu-sru would remove, I would hope for the
> > >> MOTU team to
> > >> remove them too in the voting.
> > >
> > > The large benefit of allowing the existing members of motu-sru to
> > > select amoung the volunteers is to ensure that the team works well
> > > together. If there is a removal with which MOTU disagree, such
> > > objection ought be raised in response to the motu-sru publication of
> > > the candidates.
> > >
> > > While I can't be entirely sure, I suspect there will be time
> > > between the publication of the slate of candidates and MOTU Council
> > > configuring the appropriate polls for selection.
> >
> > I am strongly opposed to pre-selection. We have had cases in the past
> > where a non-transparent pre-selection process resulted in a very limited
> > and from the perspective of at least a significant slice of the community
> > very unsuitable set of choices.
>
> I'm also opposed to opaque membership processes, *however* I also think
> that current team members are in a good position (in most cases, IMO better
> than MOTU-at-large) to judge candidates. I personally think if MOTU are
> just going to pick random people because they've heard of them or
> something, then we're better off having MOTU SRU making pre-selections (not
> final
> selections).

So far, from my perspective, the record of private pre-selections is not good.
I understand what you are saying, but I believe that we will get a better
result if all interested MOTUs have input. Also I think the idea of a group
privately disallowing participation is not very Ubuntu.

> > As an organization consisting largely of volunteers, the legitimacy of
> > our management teams comes from the fact that MOTU have selected them.
> > Once there is a pre-selection, this legitimacy is lost. If someone
> > volunteers that might be problematic, I think that we should trust the
> > MOTU to do the right thing. Personally, I'm not at all opposed to MOTU
> > discussing the advantages and disadvantages of various candidates. That
> > would, of course, include the current motu-sru. I believe that whatever
> > concerns there may be that consider motu-sru to want pre-selection, I
> > think that with some constructive discussion as we move to a vote the can
> > be managed transparently in an effective way.
>
> Well, I'm not sure if legitimacy is neccesarily lost. Some is I suppose is,
> but the team members are still MOTUs so the question is really whether a
> subset of MOTU should do some selection or whether the whole thing,
> top-to-bottom, should be handled by MOTU-at-large. Ideally I would like the
> entire MOTU team deciding teams but issues I see are:
> * many MOTU don't vote in the first place. I don't believe we've ever
> gotten over 50%. Most votes during MOTU Meetings are 4-8 people.

Yes, but when we've had elections it's been over a longer period with more
participation. If the polity self-selects to those who care, I don't think
it's a problem.

> * historically I don't see where we've been able to comprehensively vett
> people without devolving into a flamefest.

True, but I also think that was largely in cases where preselection had
narrowed the choices to a yes/no option. I think preselection encourages
this.

> * time consuming. Giving time for comments, time for nominatiions, time
> for voting, etc. can easily make the process of getting new members take at
> least 1 month.

True, but in the long run having teams that we've agreed can control access to
the archive for MOTUs in some circumstances that is well accepted by the
community is worth it IMO.

> Perhaps we can put some things in place to mitigate these issues.
> /me crawls back under his rock.
>
> -Jordan

Thanks for commenting. It's better to discuss this back and forth.

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 05-30-2008, 08:55 PM
Stefan Potyra
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

Hi folks,

Am Freitag 23 Mai 2008 15:48:31 schrieb Stephan Hermann:
[..]
>
> Count me as candidate...
>
> sh


so it's Friday now, and Stephan is the only candidate so far (thanks again for
volunteering, Stephan!).

Imho voting doesn't make too much sense to me for this case, given that we
don't have much choices.

If you however still want a vote, or believe, that we should follow a
different procedure *for this particular case* please reply until Monday
evening. Otherwise I'd ask that Stephan gets added to motu-sru on Tuesday.

Cheers,
Stefan.
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 05-30-2008, 09:08 PM
Siegfried-Angel
 
Default wanted: motu-sru members

> so it's Friday now, and Stephan is the only candidate so far (thanks again for
> volunteering, Stephan!).

Oh, I thought there would be more interest on this. Come on people!! :P

I'd step out but I don't think that I'm ready for it (I've only done
two SRUs until now) .

Regards,

--
Siegfried-Angel Gevatter Pujals (RainCT)
GNU/Linux User #438657. Ubuntu User #11680.

P.D.: Uhm... Why am I sending this mail if it doesn't say anything? :P

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:07 PM.

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