Ubuntu Contributing Developer Application : Marc Cluet

[Benjamin Drung]

Am Dienstag, den 21.06.2011, 15:44 -0400 schrieb Cody A.W. Somerville:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Mackenzie Morgan <macoafi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>         On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Marc Cluet
>         <marc.cluet at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>         > You can find the application in the
>         >
>         wiki https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MarcCluet/UbuntuContributingDeveloper
>         
>         
>         The result of this application was a split vote.
>         +1:  maco, bdrung, stgraber
>         +0: geser (later noted that with LP account merger, more
>         sponsored
>         uploads showed up, but still on the fence, like +0.5, if
>         possible)
>         -1: cody-somerville
>         
>         For a total of +2.  Debate followed about whether
>         majority-of-board or
>         majority-of-quorum-present was needed. Temporary resolution
>         was to ask
>         here for Laney & persia to give their votes.
> 
> Provided I'm remembering correctly (and I believe I am), we previously
> discussed and agreed that the sum of all the votes must be +4 (its
> unfortunate we didn't document it but I don't think it'll be
> difficulty to find the relevant e-mail thread or IRC discussion). 
> Furthermore, we've currently set a precedent where if the result of an
> application could be positively changed by the votes of non-present
> members we defer to the mailing list to permit vote by e-mail and
> where the application could be negatively changed we just assume +0
> votes.

Assuming +0 votes for non-present members can lead to different results
depending on whether a member is present or not.

> Effectively this means that board members who wish to see the
> application accepted can vote +1 to positively effect the application,
> members who do not feel comfortable either way can vote +0 to have a
> neutral effect (this is not a 'non-vote'), and members who are not
> comfortable with accepting the application can vote -1. I believe this
> system is fair and I am in favour of keeping it - every vote (even +0)
> is meaningful and its not possible for one board member to veto but it
> is possible for a board member to raise the barrier of entry if they
> have concerns (ie. -1) and to not help (but not necessarily hinder) if
> they're unsure (ie. +0).
> 
> Here are some example scenarios:
> 
> +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 = +7 - candidate accepted
> +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 = +6 - candidate accepted
> +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 -1 = +5 - candidate accepted
> +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 +0 = +5 - candidate accepted
> +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 -1 = +4 - candidate accepted
> +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 +0 +0 = +4 - candidate accepted
> +1 +1 +1 +1 +0 +0 -1 = +3 - candidate not accepted
> +1 +1 +1 +0 +0 +0 -1 = +2 - candidate not accepted
> -1 -1 +0 +0 +0 +1 +1 =  +0 - candidate not accepted
> -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 =  -1 - candidate not accepted

-- 
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/attachments/20110621/daeed1bc/attachment.pgp>