On 2010-06-18 13:00:17 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Kubuntu-dev only covers main.
That explains my mistake. So the kubuntu package set only covers the KDE
subset from main and allows Kubuntu developers to upload those without
being a core-dev. Any KDE packages that are in universe aren't part
On Friday, June 18, 2010 09:28:31 am Daniel Holbach wrote:
> I have worked with Fabrice before and I'm sorry for him to be center of
> the discussion right now, I'm convinced he didn't want to push somebody
> away.
Whatever else I think about this issue, I definitely agree with this. I meant
the
On 06/18/2010 09:46 AM, Michael Bienia wrote:
> On 2010-06-18 09:07:36 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>> I looked it up and it was
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ChristianMangold/MOTUDeveloperApplication
>>
>> http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/04/27/%23ubuntu-meeting.html
>>
>> Specifically, he was told
On 2010-06-18 09:07:36 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I looked it up and it was
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ChristianMangold/MOTUDeveloperApplication
>
> http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/04/27/%23ubuntu-meeting.html
>
> Specifically, he was told by a DMB member that MOTU is for generalists and he
On 17.06.2010 21:28, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Several people, myself included, argued against this since if we fragment
> Universe too much, the potential set of MOTU recruits will narrow
> significantly. We decided that it was perfectly OK for potential MOTU to be
> somewhat focused as long as
On 17.06.2010 23:11, Soren Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 03:28:26PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> This is pretty close to the UDS discussion. A number of Kubuntu people
>> wanted a separate package set because, specifically, of people who
>> focused on these packages getting deferred f
On Thursday, June 17, 2010 05:24:08 pm Michael Bienia wrote:
> On 2010-06-17 16:58:12 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > "Michael Bienia" wrote:
> > >On 2010-06-17 15:28:26 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > >> This is pretty close to the UDS discussion. A number of Kubuntu people
> > >> wanted a se
On 2010-06-17 16:58:12 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> "Michael Bienia" wrote:
>
> >On 2010-06-17 15:28:26 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >> This is pretty close to the UDS discussion. A number of Kubuntu people
> >> wanted a separate package set because, specifically, of people who
> >> focused
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 03:28:26PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> This is pretty close to the UDS discussion. A number of Kubuntu people
> wanted a separate package set because, specifically, of people who
> focused on these packages getting deferred from MOTU because the had
> worked too much on
On 2010-06-17 15:28:26 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> This is pretty close to the UDS discussion. A number of Kubuntu people
> wanted a separate package set because, specifically, of people who
> focused on these packages getting deferred from MOTU because the had
> worked too much on KDE stuff.
On 17.06.2010 14:17, Ralph Janke wrote:
> Furthermore, does that also mean that people that work primarily
> on Gnome packages will have the same of similar restrictions?
There are no restrictions.
I never used Qt/KDE apps myself much, but I talked to a number of Qt/KDE
people and sponsored quite
On 2010-06-17 08:17:04 -0400, Ralph Janke wrote:
> On 06/16/2010 02:52 PM, Soren Hansen wrote:
> >
> > This is not isolated to people working on KDE stuff. With the advent of
> > more and more package sets, people are more likely to get granted upload
> > privs to those rather than getting full MOT
On 06/16/2010 02:52 PM, Soren Hansen wrote:
>
> This is not isolated to people working on KDE stuff. With the advent of
> more and more package sets, people are more likely to get granted upload
> privs to those rather than getting full MOTU or core-dev, since (at
> least I'm reasonably sure this i
"Soren Hansen" wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 05:24:32PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> "Soren Hansen" wrote:
>>>Again, I have to stress that noone was thrown out of #ubuntu-motu. A
>>>more focused forum was simply pointed out.
>> I get that you think it's OK to tell people who want to be a
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 05:24:32PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> "Soren Hansen" wrote:
>>Again, I have to stress that noone was thrown out of #ubuntu-motu. A
>>more focused forum was simply pointed out.
> I get that you think it's OK to tell people who want to be a MOTU to
> go elsewhere if they
> If the situation were that he was asking for help with a specific package,
> then I would agree.
>
> Scott K
>
> --
> Ubuntu-motu mailing list
> Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
>
We are all free to have op
Ar Mer, 2010-06-16 am 18:47 -0400, ysgrifennodd Scott Kitterman:
>
> "Christopher Swift" wrote:
>
> >Ar Mer, 2010-06-16 am 17:24 -0400, ysgrifennodd Scott Kitterman:
> >> I get that you think it's OK to tell people who want to be a MOTU to go
> >> elsewhere if they express an interest in a KD
"Christopher Swift" wrote:
>Ar Mer, 2010-06-16 am 17:24 -0400, ysgrifennodd Scott Kitterman:
>> I get that you think it's OK to tell people who want to be a MOTU to go
>> elsewhere if they express an interest in a KDE/Qt packages.
>>
>> I disagree.
>>
>> Scott K
>>
>Scott, in this conv
Ar Mer, 2010-06-16 am 17:24 -0400, ysgrifennodd Scott Kitterman:
> I get that you think it's OK to tell people who want to be a MOTU to go
> elsewhere if they express an interest in a KDE/Qt packages.
>
> I disagree.
>
> Scott K
>
Scott, in this conversation from what I have read in the th
"Soren Hansen" wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 01:44:39PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> The conversation didn't start with "help me with this package". It
>> started with "I want to be a MOTU".
>
>True.
>
>> My read is someone who said they wanted to become a MOTU was sent away
>> and that's
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 01:44:39PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> The conversation didn't start with "help me with this package". It
> started with "I want to be a MOTU".
True.
> My read is someone who said they wanted to become a MOTU was sent away
> and that's not very Ubuntu. #kubuntu-devel i
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 01:44:39PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> The conversation didn't start with "help me with this package". It
> started with "I want to be a MOTU".
>
> My read is someone who said they wanted to become a MOTU was sent away
> and that's not very Ubuntu. #kubuntu-devel is not
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:10:53AM -0400, ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
>>On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:03:52PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> Today in my backscroll I see:
>>>
>>> [15:13:58] shadeslayer, what do you want?
>>[...]
>>> [15:29:16] fabrice_sp: that package was sponsored by
>>> maco i
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 08:44:01AM -0400, Ralph Janke wrote:
> The issue is not that any term that was used is offensive, it
> is deeper subtlety that needs to be addressed.
I wasn't using "offensive" in the sense of "profane", but more in the
sense of "problematic."
> As Scott has said, we had d
Hi,
2010/6/16 James Westby :
> That's not how I read it. They were told that if they were intereted in
> KDE packages they could hang around in the Kubuntu channels.
And that's exactly what I meant with my comment.
> I agree that telling someone they were in the wrong place would be
> wrong, but
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 10:10:53 -0400, "ubu...@kitterman.com"
wrote:
> The part where someone is told because the package name starts with q,
> #ubuntu-motu is the wrong channel. The person doing the asking is in
> fact very active in #kubuntu-devel, but was reaching out to MOTU to
> try and broaden
On 16.06.2010 16:10, ubu...@kitterman.com wrote:
> The part where someone is told because the package name starts with q,
> #ubuntu-motu is the wrong channel. The person doing the asking is in fact
> very active in #kubuntu-devel, but was reaching out to MOTU to try and
> broaden themselves when
I think you are mislead by the term "Masters of the Universe". At no
point is everyone in #ubuntu-motu a domain specific expert on every
facet of every type of package. For expert advice, you probably want
to join channels dedicated to that subject.
I see MOTU as a channel for general questions
"Soren Hansen" wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:03:52PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> Today in my backscroll I see:
>>
>> [15:13:58] shadeslayer, what do you want?
>[...]
>> [15:29:16] fabrice_sp: that package was sponsored by maco in
>> #kubuntu-devel :P
>>
>> This is completely inap
The issue is not that any term that was used is offensive, it
is deeper subtlety that needs to be addressed.
As Scott has said, we had discussions about that before
and at the UDS to the point that there was the question
if there should be a second "MOTU" group for the KDE
packages in universe.
H
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:03:52PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Today in my backscroll I see:
>
> [15:13:58] shadeslayer, what do you want?
[...]
> [15:29:16] fabrice_sp: that package was sponsored by maco in
> #kubuntu-devel :P
>
> This is completely inappropriate. Let me know when #ubuntu
We had a session at UDS on the idea of creating a separate package set for
Qt/KDE packages in Universe because there was a well founded feeling that
people who happened to want to work in that area were being excluded from
MOTU.
The result of the discussion was that it was decided not to crea
32 matches
Mail list logo
