Mailing list only appliations for Contributing Developer

[Robie Basak]

I proposed in today's IRC meeting that Contributing Developer
applications could probably be handled entirely on the mailing list
without the need for an IRC meeting.

My reasoning is that while I prefer IRC meetings to assess knowledge,
capability and understanding, that isn't needed for a Contributing
Developer application.

For example, today's applicant wasn't asked any questions and got
unanimous +1s and this seems like a general pattern for this type of
application. I don't like making people do things without a good reason,
so this seems like a good opportunity to cut out this red tape.

I suggest the following process, trying to accommodate handle edge
cases that come to mind:

1. We start Contributing Developer applications on the mailing list
only. This will require a documentation adjustment to inform applicants
that they don't need to book an application meeting, but otherwise the
process would be the same. If they do book an application meeting then
that isn't a problem as we'll have a specific meeting where we resolve
the situation.

2. DMB members can ask questions, but please allow some time for other
members to ask questions before voting (say a week).

3. If a DMB member asks for an IRC meeting instead because something
comes up, then we should postpone voting until that has happened. But
otherwise, we can call for votes on the mailing list after a week, and
if enough DMB members vote +1 by email (that's 50% of the DMB rounded up
as is the existing rule), then we can call it done.

4. At IRC meetings we should check on and respond to any outstanding
Contributing Developer applications as a standing item. This may require
voting, assigning actions to make ACL changes and/or the announcement as
required if those things are still outstanding at the time of the
meeting, and so forth.

5. To avoid a weird situation where an incomplete vote is "completed"
after a very long time, I suggest that mailing lists votes that are
pending more votes to reach quorum should be treated as "expired" and
require a new vote one calendar month after the vote is made, or one or
more new members join the board, whichever happens first.

What do you think? We could try to follow the same pattern here: discuss
first, then call for votes on the mailing list, and fall back to an IRC
meeting agenda item if this thread isn't resolved by the next IRC
meeting.

Robie
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/attachments/20230904/c52f2360/attachment.sig>