Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Something else that would be interesting to store in UDD is the full bug > logs, as it would allow to list the comments that someone posted to > bugs. That's expensive, but maybe we could only store a subset of > information, like the From, Date, and Subject fields. You can already get this with http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?correspondent=lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net (or the appropriate Debbugs::SOAP::get_bugs(correspondent=>'foo'); call, or bts select correspondent:lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net) Don Armstrong -- The solution to a problem changes the problem. -- Peer's Law http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On 25/03/09 at 10:39 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 09:44:05AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > I also saw mass updates of Vcs-* fields by a recent contributor which > > implies as many entries in debian/changelog, yet very few real packaging > > experience associated to all those uploads. > > > > The data would be useful but we need humam judgment at some point. > > Fair enough, but an upload is in principle no different (e.g., compare > an upload fixing 5 RC bugs with an [unappropriate] upload with only > bump Standards-Version). All such metrics need human judgment, but I > believe the proposed one gives an overall reasonable figure. Yes, we need to add debian/changelog data into UDD. (Patches welcomed) Once this is done, we could write a "contributions search tool", that, given a name and an email address, would scan data sources for contributions. (bugs, uploads, mentions in changelog, etc) Something else that would be interesting to store in UDD is the full bug logs, as it would allow to list the comments that someone posted to bugs. That's expensive, but maybe we could only store a subset of information, like the From, Date, and Subject fields. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 09:44:05AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I also saw mass updates of Vcs-* fields by a recent contributor which
> implies as many entries in debian/changelog, yet very few real packaging
> experience associated to all those uploads.
>
> The data would be useful but we need humam judgment at some point.
Fair enough, but an upload is in principle no different (e.g., compare
an upload fixing 5 RC bugs with an [unappropriate] upload with only
bump Standards-Version). All such metrics need human judgment, but I
believe the proposed one gives an overall reasonable figure.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:47:09AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > > The 'minimum count of packages uploaded' seems contradictory with the > > wish to have people join existing teams. There's a lot of work that we > > need done and that doesn't involve uploading packages. Not that I have > > a better metric, mind you. > > Not that it is *that* relevant at this point, but one can count the > number of uploads in which a "[ Name Surname ]" entry exist. Now that > team maintenance has become popular, that should be what we count wrt > the number of uploads we used counted in the past. I also saw mass updates of Vcs-* fields by a recent contributor which implies as many entries in debian/changelog, yet very few real packaging experience associated to all those uploads. The data would be useful but we need humam judgment at some point. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Contribuez à Debian et gagnez un cahier de l'admin Debian Lenny : http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2009/03/02/contribuer-a-debian-gagner-un-livre/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:47:09AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> The 'minimum count of packages uploaded' seems contradictory with the
> wish to have people join existing teams. There's a lot of work that we
> need done and that doesn't involve uploading packages. Not that I have
> a better metric, mind you.
Not that it is *that* relevant at this point, but one can count the
number of uploads in which a "[ Name Surname ]" entry exist. Now that
team maintenance has become popular, that should be what we count wrt
the number of uploads we used counted in the past.
.oO( we need to add something like that to UDD ...)
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:47:09AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: >On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 00:56 +, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> In terms of the right to vote in Debian, I'm thinking that does need >> to be earned by an obvious long-term commitment to the project. Maybe >> a minimum count of packages uploaded, or strings translated, or web >> pages written over a 1-year period would work for that. > >The 'minimum count of packages uploaded' seems contradictory with the >wish to have people join existing teams. There's a lot of work that we >need done and that doesn't involve uploading packages. Not that I have >a better metric, mind you. Yup, I agree. It's not an easy thing to measure, but we need to come up with something. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com "This dress doesn't reverse." -- Alden Spiess -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 00:56 +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > In terms of the right to vote in Debian, I'm thinking that does need > to be earned by an obvious long-term commitment to the project. Maybe > a minimum count of packages uploaded, or strings translated, or web > pages written over a 1-year period would work for that. The 'minimum count of packages uploaded' seems contradictory with the wish to have people join existing teams. There's a lot of work that we need done and that doesn't involve uploading packages. Not that I have a better metric, mind you. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 11:34:57AM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > What's your opinion on membership procedures? > > Last year there were some rough proposals for how to change the > membership procedures. It started with Joerg's proposal, but other > people suggested their own kinds of changes, including me. I feel > that my approach and Joerg's are pretty much diametrically > opposed. What's your opinion? Do you feel the current NM process > works well and almost always selects for the kind of people that are > really great for Debian? Would some other kind of process work > better? What kind of membership process would you like to see in > Debian in, say, a year from now? Heya, here I am after having re-read your proposal (which I take, from your reply, has not been significantly affected by the resulting discussion). You ask me to dream, ... let's dream. I dream of: - an NM process where the enthusiasm of applicants does not encounter frustrations due to delays they cannot understand - a project in which not only technical skills matter for being able to vote - membership principles which acknowledge the level of commitment contributors are willing to offer: if in the beginning you are willing only to work on X, you will be able to work on X, getting from the project the credit and the recognition you deserve; if you are willing to do more you will get more tools to do that and more credit for your achievements - a do-ocratic project in which everybody is free to temporarily leave when real life strikes back, with no shame, and come back whenever he/she wants and has time again to contribute - a project where core teams, on the work of which the whole project depends, exhibit no concentration of powers. That is: * job descriptions are crystal clear, * "recruiting" procedures are as clear and always open to new applicants, * team members are on the order of 10 people rather then 2 (no problem if one is *the* leader, but the others should be able to backup him/her up in case of emergencies), * there is no overlapping of people among the core teams, * there is no bureaucratic bottleneck imposed by the fact that core teams are under-staffed. Now, regarding the two proposals. Joerg proposal [1] was an _evolutionary_ one starting from the status quo, introducing a new class of non-technical contributors, and also meant to fix (as I interpreted it back then) some of the technical oddities of the current DM/DD duality. The main problem of that proposal has been in the way it has been pushed; a way which has been refused [3] for that reason. Your proposal [2] touched more subjects which IMO warrant separate discussions. I'll comment on the main topics. - Project membership should expire: full ACK. The way you propose to achieve that (putting into use the right to vote) is not the only possible way, uploads are another, but I agree with the principle, the rest are details at this point. - All members get both voting and upload rights: not sure. I've no strong objection, but I've the impression that there are out there contributors which couldn't care less about upload rights; if this is so I don't see why giving them that (if you want: don't fix what is not broken). Same goes in the other direction. - Expulsion via GR. Yes, makes sense. It is a scenario rare enough where we don't need to appeal to representative democracy to handle it, as we currently do with the over-engineered expulsion procedure. - Join via consensus: agreed in principle, worries about practical applicability. We have a lot of sub-areas in Debian, areas which do not necessarily know each other. NM are often willing to join because they are interested in a single area. Asking for project consensus sounds me a bit odd. E.g.: I don't know what I can say about the acceptance in Debian of a guy interested in working on translations or Java package maintenance, while I can have a lot to say about the acceptance of a guy interested in maintaining OCaml packages or the PTS. I would be much more in favor of join via a philosophy and procedure and then delegate technical skill review to the teams the NM is planning to work in in the beginning (which would also give some guaranteed of social interaction ability). - Keyring maintenance: agreed with what you wrote, which however in my mind settled down a bit differently "let's enlarge the keyring maintenance team, and use jetring". This, however, is an example of a point which deserves IMO a separate discussion, asking keyring maintainers for comments. A final remark. Choices like the above one need project ultra-wide discussions and clear decisions via GRs. What I will do as DPL, if the time come, is just to ensure that we clarify the available options (yours being one of them) and have a vote on them; the DPL should do no more than that. Cheers. PS Yes, I know you did not ask for explicit
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 11:34:57AM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: >la, 2009-03-21 kello 01:42 +, Steve McIntyre kirjoitti: >> P.S. Damn, just read Zack's answer and we don't seem to differ very >> much. Oh well... :-) > >Dear Zack McIntyre, Steve Claes, and Luk Zacchiroli, Hi Lars Garbee! >What's your opinion on membership procedures? > >Last year there were some rough proposals for how to change the >membership procedures. It started with Joerg's proposal, but other >people suggested their own kinds of changes, including me. I feel that >my approach and Joerg's are pretty much diametrically opposed. What's >your opinion? Do you feel the current NM process works well and almost >always selects for the kind of people that are really great for Debian? >Would some other kind of process work better? What kind of membership >process would you like to see in Debian in, say, a year from now? Please >feel free to dream, there's no point in being too constricted by reality >and practical considerations. My own feelings about Debian membership are a little varied, I think. At the moment, I believe that there *is* quite some benefit to the long(-ish) current NM process in that it does help us select for people who are likely to have the persistence to stay in Debian once they are accepted. As a project we've been around for a long time, and I expect that we'll also hang around for quite a long time to come. It's good for us and our users if we have some continuity in personnel, and people who are not going to give up, get bored and wander off only a short time. However, I don't think we always check enough to see how NMs interact with others and I'd be much happier to see more of our NMs join teams and work in groups to start with. Technical excellence is great, but if you're impossible to work with then I don't think Debian is the right place for you. However, to offset that, I also think that we should give clear recognition to more of our contributors. The large groups of dedicated documenters, translators, testers and users who help to support each other all deserve some kudos for their efforts. How should that be shown? I believe that giving out debian.org addresses for people who have done a reasonable amount of work would be a good start. How much work? Good question. :-) In terms of the right to vote in Debian, I'm thinking that does need to be earned by an obvious long-term commitment to the project. Maybe a minimum count of packages uploaded, or strings translated, or web pages written over a 1-year period would work for that. For the rights to upload packages directly or to have logins on the various project machines, they should also be earned. After a number of sponsors are happy with sensible uploads, you get upload rights. If you need access to a project machine, it's given to you after a certain probation period. That may sound a little incoherent, but you did ask for dreams... :-) Overall, I'd like to see more of a continuum of privileges and duties in the Debian project. I'm happy to see that we're ready to have some open discussions about moving in that direction. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Welcome my son, welcome to the machine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
ma, 2009-03-23 kello 14:52 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli kirjoitti: > I'm going to respond to this as soon as I complete my backlog of > week-end email. In the meantime I've a request that will help people > following this discussion. Can you please point us all to your > proposal, possibly revised with changes raised in the discussion, if > any? I do remind your proposal, but I'm not sure whether it was > significantly changed during the subsequent discussion or not. My message is here: http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2008/10/msg00145.html However, I'm asking the candidates to hear what their opinions are on how Debian should handle membership. I don't desire a detailed commentary on the various proposals (if only since that would take a lot of time to write and read). I am interested in the candidates' opinions, rather than their reactions to other people's opinions. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 11:34:57AM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> What's your opinion on membership procedures?
Hi Lars, thanks for the question.
> I feel that my approach and Joerg's are pretty much diametrically
> opposed. What's your opinion?
I'm going to respond to this as soon as I complete my backlog of
week-end email. In the meantime I've a request that will help people
following this discussion. Can you please point us all to your
proposal, possibly revised with changes raised in the discussion, if
any? I do remind your proposal, but I'm not sure whether it was
significantly changed during the subsequent discussion or not.
Many thanks in advance,
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
Lars Wirzenius wrote: > su, 2009-03-22 kello 17:01 +0100, Luk Claes kirjoitti: >> I think we first have to think about what a member, if we need different >> types of access/members and what they would be before thinking about the >> process(es) to become a member. I do think for instance that >> contributers who spend a lot of effort in Debian (like for instance some >> translators) should be able to become a member and so be able to vote. > > Translators can already become members of the project, as far as I know. It's already possible, though not it's not very known nor easy for a translator to become a DD AFAIK. > For the rest of your answer, I must admit I remain in the unclear about > what you think, Luk: the questions you raise are certainly questions > that should be raised in this discussion, but do you have answers or > opinions on them, even if preliminary? I'm not looking anything set in > stone, but I'd like to know what the candidates think on these issues. > Do you think the current process if mostly fine, or you think it needs > to be scrapped and re-created from scratch? Or something else? *The* current process is not very obvious to me as there is the DM process for limited upload rights and the NM process to become a DD (access to machines, upload rights, voting rights, some extra benefits like the email address). I think it's wrong to make totally separate processes with gross hacks in core tools of our infrastructure to support multiple types of membership. So I do think that the questions I posed are to be answered first before rethinking details in the processes: there first needs to be a global picture. I do think that the current DD and DM statuses are not the only types of membership there should be or not necessarily in its current form. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
su, 2009-03-22 kello 17:01 +0100, Luk Claes kirjoitti: > I think we first have to think about what a member, if we need different > types of access/members and what they would be before thinking about the > process(es) to become a member. I do think for instance that > contributers who spend a lot of effort in Debian (like for instance some > translators) should be able to become a member and so be able to vote. Translators can already become members of the project, as far as I know. For the rest of your answer, I must admit I remain in the unclear about what you think, Luk: the questions you raise are certainly questions that should be raised in this discussion, but do you have answers or opinions on them, even if preliminary? I'm not looking anything set in stone, but I'd like to know what the candidates think on these issues. Do you think the current process if mostly fine, or you think it needs to be scrapped and re-created from scratch? Or something else? I'd also be fine with an answer just saying that it's not an issue the candidate has spent much time thinking about, and so does not have an opinion on it at the current time. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
Lars Wirzenius wrote: > la, 2009-03-21 kello 01:42 +, Steve McIntyre kirjoitti: >> P.S. Damn, just read Zack's answer and we don't seem to differ very >> much. Oh well... :-) > > Dear Zack McIntyre, Steve Claes, and Luk Zacchiroli, > > What's your opinion on membership procedures? > > Last year there were some rough proposals for how to change the > membership procedures. It started with Joerg's proposal, but other > people suggested their own kinds of changes, including me. I feel that > my approach and Joerg's are pretty much diametrically opposed. What's > your opinion? Do you feel the current NM process works well and almost > always selects for the kind of people that are really great for Debian? > Would some other kind of process work better? What kind of membership > process would you like to see in Debian in, say, a year from now? Please > feel free to dream, there's no point in being too constricted by reality > and practical considerations. I think we first have to think about what a member, if we need different types of access/members and what they would be before thinking about the process(es) to become a member. I do think for instance that contributers who spend a lot of effort in Debian (like for instance some translators) should be able to become a member and so be able to vote. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: All candidates: Membership procedures
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 11:34:57AM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > la, 2009-03-21 kello 01:42 +, Steve McIntyre kirjoitti: > > P.S. Damn, just read Zack's answer and we don't seem to differ very > > much. Oh well... :-) > > Dear Zack McIntyre, Steve Claes, and Luk Zacchiroli, > > What's your opinion on membership procedures? > > Last year there were some rough proposals for how to change the > membership procedures. It started with Joerg's proposal, but other > people suggested their own kinds of changes, including me. I feel that > my approach and Joerg's are pretty much diametrically opposed. What's > your opinion? Do you feel the current NM process works well and almost > always selects for the kind of people that are really great for Debian? > Would some other kind of process work better? What kind of membership > process would you like to see in Debian in, say, a year from now? Please > feel free to dream, there's no point in being too constricted by reality > and practical considerations. I'd also be interested in hearing the response to this, as it would be one of the key points that would decide where my vote went signature.asc Description: Digital signature
All candidates: Membership procedures
la, 2009-03-21 kello 01:42 +, Steve McIntyre kirjoitti: > P.S. Damn, just read Zack's answer and we don't seem to differ very > much. Oh well... :-) Dear Zack McIntyre, Steve Claes, and Luk Zacchiroli, What's your opinion on membership procedures? Last year there were some rough proposals for how to change the membership procedures. It started with Joerg's proposal, but other people suggested their own kinds of changes, including me. I feel that my approach and Joerg's are pretty much diametrically opposed. What's your opinion? Do you feel the current NM process works well and almost always selects for the kind of people that are really great for Debian? Would some other kind of process work better? What kind of membership process would you like to see in Debian in, say, a year from now? Please feel free to dream, there's no point in being too constricted by reality and practical considerations. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
