On 07/21/2011 12:05 PM, Iain Lane wrote: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:40:44AM -0700, Chase Douglas wrote: >> The point is that I believe there are cases where it makes sense to >> bestow Ubuntu membership on upstream-only individuals. When we create >> and enforce policy, we need to keep in mind that we may be forsaking >> valid corner-cases. Imo, A policy that says the DMB cannot grant >> membership to an upstream-only contributor is too restrictive. If >> anything, we should be as open as possible at the membership level. >> Spread the love! > > I didn't say that these people shouldn't be given membership. I said > that the DMB isn't the right board to do this. We're don't grant > membership to everyone who makes technical contributions. We grant > membership (and upload access) to people interested in doing Ubuntu > Development. This isn't excessive bureaucracy. It's a board not > overstepping its bounds and, frankly, its competence.
I understand that the DMB wasn't set up to deal with this specific case. However, if every board says "this isn't my realm", then we have a problem. There should be a board that is capable of handling non-standard applications. Maybe that isn't the DMB. The reason I thought it should be the DMB is because it is the most centralized membership board, in terms of geography and understanding of Ubuntu development, that I am aware of. > As I said before, there's currently no way for people who are only > upstream contributors to get membership. The CC needs to decide how this > should work, and how the membership applications are to be handled. Perhaps it would be better to just define one board to handle "other" applicants. -- Chase -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel