Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Wednesday 07 January 2009 13:22, Daniel Holbach wrote: >> Dustin Kirkland schrieb: >>> I really believe the MOTU and Core-Dev application processes would >>> greatly benefit from some minimal, objective criteria. It should be >>> perfectly clear that meeting these objective criteria will not be >>> sufficient, alone, to achieve MOTU/Core-Dev. However, I think there >>> absolutely must be something more objective for an aspiring >>> MOTU/CoreDev to achieve before taking the time/effort to apply. >> Please let's have a separate discussion about the criteria, requirements >> and expectations of new Ubuntu developers. The proposal the MOTU Council >> put on the table is only about how we deal with applications that come in. >> >> Thanks in advance, >> Daniel > > OK. Now it's a separate discussion. > > I concur with Dustin's observations about some people getting caught up in > arbitrary requirements. I'd go the other way though. I don't think there is > any need for X uploads, Y months as a MOTU before applying for core-dev, etc. > > I think applicants should be judged on what they've done, how well they are > integrated into the community and trusted to do the right thing, and what > they potential for future contribution is. > > I think that the problem is people making up criteria that aren't actually > rules and then treating them like rules. Using Dustin's case as an example, > how can we possibly set a fraction of uploads that must be Universe > packages? "If you have < 30% Universe uploads you may not apply for MOTU and > must wait until you are ready to apply for core-dev" > > People like quantitative criteria because they can be applied without > judgement and with no perception of bias. "Everyone has to wait 6 months, so > it's not unfair we say you need to wait too". I really think that our > process is about developers judging the person ready to become a developer > and anything more specific we try to require will end up being problematic. > > Scott K >
I currently have an application which has been in progress for about a month now. Perhaps views from someone like me might help. I don't believe that there should be any set criteria based on total uploads, or which archive you upload to. I like what Scott said about the process is about developers judging if the person is ready. On the four points made by Daniel, I can agree with all but the fourth being beneficial. The reason that different Membership Boards were created was to allow those that are unable to attend CC meetings to still apply for membership. Doing something like this isn't quite as reasonable with developer applications, and as such it may become very difficult for people to make it to the meetings. I am in this position. Perhaps what could work is that the process is kept to email. Everything which Daniel suggested can be done here, with links to wiki pages (where sponsorship feedback could be left) etc. From there, the meetings can take place, and the MC can decide whether or not to accept an application there, meaning that the developer who is applying does not have to be there, but of course could be. Thanks, Nick -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
