On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 08:54:00PM +0200, Michael Bienia wrote:
> On 2011-07-25 16:11:43 +0100, Iain Lane wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 05:01:35PM +0200, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> > > I agree that the name is misleading and it's unfortunate that it
> > > confuses applicants. It'd be good to chan
Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Michael Bienia
>wrote:
>> I'm for a name change but only if it makes things more clear and
>easier
>> to understand. But I disagree on "Ubuntu Development Members" as it's
>> too easy to mix it up with "Ubuntu Developers". If applicants
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Michael Bienia wrote:
> I'm for a name change but only if it makes things more clear and easier
> to understand. But I disagree on "Ubuntu Development Members" as it's
> too easy to mix it up with "Ubuntu Developers". If applicants assume
> they get upload rights w
On 2011-07-25 16:11:43 +0100, Iain Lane wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 05:01:35PM +0200, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> > I agree that the name is misleading and it's unfortunate that it
> > confuses applicants. It'd be good to change it something sensible. Even
> > if we just change it in the documenta
On 2011-07-25 22:58:10 -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On 25 July 2011 07:45, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > I would recommend people to apply for 'Ubuntu Contributing Developer'
> > before applying for MOTU or core-dev.
>
> I disagree with your recommendation. I recently got my Ubuntu
> membership throu
On 2011-07-25 07:51:17 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I think it's a fair point that UCD is confusing. What it means is "Ubuntu
> member that got their membership based on development contribution and not
> some other kind". Do we really need a different name for this? It might be
> more cle
On 2011-07-25 14:48:38 -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
> On 07/25/2011 02:05 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > Package set members having exclusive lock on packages is something that has
> > been discussed, but AIUI (except for packagesets corresponding to Main)
> > there
> > are no such restrictive pa
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> I don't see how gaining this extra title encourages additional
> involvement. Maybe if the title meant something...
In my experience, people like to have their contributions acknowledged.
And yes, it doesn't mean much now. I readily admitted
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 02:41:29PM -0400, Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> > At UDS for Karmic (Barcelona) we had a session that defined the current
> > state
> > of things. We discussed renaming MOTU and decided against it. IMO this
> > sort
> > of "Oh, it's different now ..." "MOTU will need to be r
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 04:06:16AM -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On 26 July 2011 03:27, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
>
> Why should I go through the bother of becoming an UCD as a
> prerequisite to further development privileges and resp
On 26 July 2011 03:27, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
>>
>> I disagree with your recommendation. I recently got my Ubuntu
>> membership through the Regional Boards and it turns out I was a good
>> candidate for the Ubuntu Contributing Develo
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
>
> I disagree with your recommendation. I recently got my Ubuntu
> membership through the Regional Boards and it turns out I was a good
> candidate for the Ubuntu Contributing Developer (UCD) route which I
> had actually not heard of yet. UCD
On 25 July 2011 07:45, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Montag, den 25.07.2011, 13:01 +0200 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz:
>> On 22.07.2011 10:41, Daniel Holbach wrote:
>> > = Development Processes =
>>
>> > (2) developer application docs:
>> > - too complicated,
>> > - unclear expectations
>>
>
On Monday, July 25, 2011 04:52:42 PM Micah Gersten wrote:
> On 07/25/2011 03:46 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Monday, July 25, 2011 03:48:38 PM Micah Gersten wrote:
> >> On 07/25/2011 02:05 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >>> On Monday, July 25, 2011 02:41:29 PM Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> >>> ...
>
On 07/25/2011 03:46 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, July 25, 2011 03:48:38 PM Micah Gersten wrote:
>> On 07/25/2011 02:05 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> On Monday, July 25, 2011 02:41:29 PM Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
There was a discussion about it on IRC last week starting at
On Monday, July 25, 2011 03:48:38 PM Micah Gersten wrote:
> On 07/25/2011 02:05 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Monday, July 25, 2011 02:41:29 PM Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >> There was a discussion about it on IRC last week starting at
> >> http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2011/07/18/%23ubu
On 07/25/2011 02:05 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, July 25, 2011 02:41:29 PM Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> ...
>> There was a discussion about it on IRC last week starting at
>> http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2011/07/18/%23ubuntu-devel.html#t20:43
>>
>> In particular, this is the part about whether
On Monday, July 25, 2011 02:41:29 PM Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
...
> There was a discussion about it on IRC last week starting at
> http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2011/07/18/%23ubuntu-devel.html#t20:43
>
> In particular, this is the part about whether MOTU can or can't touch
> packages in package sets...
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, July 25, 2011 12:42:49 PM Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
> ...
>> I agree that it is confusing, but I don't think it has to be. The
>> ArchiveReorganisation[1] wiki page hasn't been edited in the last 2
>> years and it has
On Monday, July 25, 2011 12:42:49 PM Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
...
> I agree that it is confusing, but I don't think it has to be. The
> ArchiveReorganisation[1] wiki page hasn't been edited in the last 2
> years and it hasn't been revisited at UDS. The process is effectively
> stalled f
On 25/07/11 11:38 AM, Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage)
> wrote:
>> I come across this on a weekly basis and I don't know where it's coming
>> from. I have people at work who fix things all the time and upload it to
>> PPAs and when I ask the
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, July 25, 2011 11:34:47 AM Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
>> There is only one difference between UCD and any other Ubuntu Member:
>> UCD can vote in new-DMB elections and in theory vote if there's ever a
>> technical decision put to a
Hiya,
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:59:08AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, July 25, 2011 11:34:47 AM Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Scott Kitterman
> wrote:
> > > I think it's a fair point that UCD is confusing. What it means is
> > > "Ubuntu member that g
On Monday, July 25, 2011 11:34:47 AM Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Scott Kitterman
wrote:
> > I think it's a fair point that UCD is confusing. What it means is
> > "Ubuntu member that got their membership based on development
> > contribution and not some other kind"
On Monday, July 25, 2011 11:33:52 AM Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Am 25.07.2011 17:26, schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> > The DMB is somewhat different than the other non-RMB membership boards
> > because the DMB grants membership based on type of contribution
> > (development) rather than area of
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage)
wrote:
> I come across this on a weekly basis and I don't know where it's coming
> from. I have people at work who fix things all the time and upload it to
> PPAs and when I ask them why they don't become MOTU so that they can fix
> i
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I think it's a fair point that UCD is confusing. What it means is "Ubuntu
> member that got their membership based on development contribution and not
> some other kind". Do we really need a different name for this? It might be
> more cl
Hello,
Am 25.07.2011 17:26, schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> The DMB is somewhat different than the other non-RMB membership boards
> because
> the DMB grants membership based on type of contribution (development) rather
> than area of contribution (Kubuntu/Edubuntu/etc), so I would not feel
> const
On Monday, July 25, 2011 11:11:43 AM Iain Lane wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 05:01:35PM +0200, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> > Hello everybody,
> >
> > Am 25.07.2011 13:51, schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> > > On Monday, July 25, 2011 07:45:50 AM Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > >> Am Montag, den 25.0
On 25/07/11 10:42 AM, Iain Lane wrote:
>> Amounts of want-to-be-ubuntu-developer levels and their names are
>> misleading. I wanted to get rights to directly upload my packages and
>> when I discussed it with few developers I was told to apply for 'Ubuntu
>> Contributing Developer' (plus some text
Hello,
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 05:01:35PM +0200, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> Am 25.07.2011 13:51, schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> > On Monday, July 25, 2011 07:45:50 AM Benjamin Drung wrote:
> >> Am Montag, den 25.07.2011, 13:01 +0200 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz:
> >>> On 22.07.2011 10
Hello everybody,
Am 25.07.2011 13:51, schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> On Monday, July 25, 2011 07:45:50 AM Benjamin Drung wrote:
>> Am Montag, den 25.07.2011, 13:01 +0200 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz:
>>> On 22.07.2011 10:41, Daniel Holbach wrote:
= Development Processes =
(2) developer a
Hi there,
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 01:01:39PM +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> On 22.07.2011 10:41, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> > = Development Processes =
>
> > (2) developer application docs:
> > - too complicated,
> > - unclear expectations
>
> Amounts of want-to-be-ubuntu-developer l
On 07/25/2011 10:35 AM, Iain Lane wrote:
> I just updated that page a bit. It's probably not clear enough that
> UCD is 'just' Ubuntu Membership granted by the DMB. Please help me
> out by finding a way to clarify this.
It would be clear if we just called it "Ubuntu Membership", rather than
having
Hello,
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 04:10:37PM +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> On 25.07.2011 13:51, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >>> So I applied and (after ~6 weeks) during UDS-O DMB's meeting I got it.
> >>> > > Just to understand that what I really needed was 'Per Package
> >>> > > Uploader'
> >>> >
On 25.07.2011 13:51, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> So I applied and (after ~6 weeks) during UDS-O DMB's meeting I got it.
>>> > > Just to understand that what I really needed was 'Per Package Uploader'
>>> > > level. So it edited my wiki page and applied again. Today I would
>>> > > totally skip first
On Monday, July 25, 2011 07:45:50 AM Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Montag, den 25.07.2011, 13:01 +0200 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz:
> > On 22.07.2011 10:41, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> > > = Development Processes =
> > >
> > > (2) developer application docs:
> > > - too complicated,
> > > - unc
Am Montag, den 25.07.2011, 13:01 +0200 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz:
> On 22.07.2011 10:41, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> > = Development Processes =
>
> > (2) developer application docs:
> > - too complicated,
> > - unclear expectations
>
> Amounts of want-to-be-ubuntu-developer levels and th
On 22.07.2011 10:41, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> = Development Processes =
> (2) developer application docs:
> - too complicated,
> - unclear expectations
Amounts of want-to-be-ubuntu-developer levels and their names are
misleading. I wanted to get rights to directly upload my packages and
On 2011-07-22 10:41, Daniel Holbach wrote:
Hello everybody,
for a while we've had a section in Ubuntu developer applications [1]
which was named "what I like least in Ubuntu". This is very valuable
feedback, since it comes from (relatively) new contributors who don't
have
Hello everybody,
for a while we've had a section in Ubuntu developer applications [1]
which was named "what I like least in Ubuntu". This is very valuable
feedback, since it comes from (relatively) new contributors who don't
have gotten used to warts and shortcomings in the d
41 matches
Mail list logo
