PPU / packageset applications and membership

Iain Lane laney at ubuntu.com
Sun Aug 2 18:16:29 UTC 2015


I just added this to the agenda.

----- Forwarded message from Ubuntu Wiki <noreply at ubuntu.com> -----

> Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2015 17:53:18 -0000
> From: Ubuntu Wiki <noreply at ubuntu.com>
> To: Ubuntu Wiki <noreply at ubuntu.com>
> Subject: [Ubuntu Wiki] Update of "DeveloperMembershipBoard/Agenda" by laney
> […]
> +  * PPU/Packageset uploader applications and membership by default (Laney)
> […]

----- End forwarded message -----

If you want to think about it before the meeting, it's about whether we
should give these applicants membership implicitly and only use our
right to not give membership when it is needed.

This came up because we forgot to add teward to either ubuntu-dev or
ubuntu-uploaders (should check if anyone else is in this situation) and
micahg disagreed with me that he should go straight to ubuntu-dev since
we didn't decide otherwise. I'm asking us to make a concrete decision.

I think my position is backed up by the initial mail I sent on this
topic, which was/is our take on the matter (it was agreed by the group
at the time IIRC, but if not then anyone could have challenged it and
they didn't).

> From: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2013-July/001674.html
> […]
> Individuals, when they apply to the DMB for packageset or PPU rights,
> will be considered separately for their upload access and for Ubuntu
> membership (the latter being optional, and usually not explicitly
> requested).
> […]
> Since some packages have a greater impact on Ubuntu users than others,
> we would like to keep the membership requirement in certain cases
> (albeit retaining the discretion to waive it in exceptional cases; this
> needn't create onerous difficulties on the part of applicants as such
> membership considerations will in most cases be implicit anyway).
> […]

This says that we split the rights, but that we didn't expect people to
have to say that they want membership too, and also that we wouldn't
explicitly membership either unless to grant upload rights without it.

Basically the default case, unless we say otherwise, should be to grant
membership. That's what I'm asking us to confirm.


Iain Lane                                  [ iain at orangesquash.org.uk ]
Debian Developer                                   [ laney at debian.org ]
Ubuntu Developer                                   [ laney at ubuntu.com ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/attachments/20150802/0b1f80d9/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Devel-permissions mailing list