Universe Contributors application for James Westby (james_w)

Emmet Hikory persia at ubuntu.com
Sat Aug 2 12:50:39 BST 2008


Michael Bienia wrote:
> On 2008-08-01 14:00:47 +0100, James Westby wrote:
>> If someone does a lot of good work through
>> the sponsors queue then they may not interact much with other
>> developers, and so it may be difficult for them to know who
>> to approach to advocate them.

> I also noticed this problem; from both sides: as a sponsoree (for my
> main uploads) and as a sponsor for universe uploads.
<...>
> Currently I don't have a solution for this. Assigning someone a small
> set of sponsors isn't a good idea as they might get busy or not
> available for a period of time (work/private live/vacation/etc.) or the
> packages the sponsoree is working on fall into different "classes" where
> one needs different sponsors who knows the matching subpolicy to better
> judge the correctness of the contribution, e.g. someone working first on
> a KDE package, then a Gnome package, then a Perl package and finally on
> a Python package. It seems impossible to determine such a set of
> sponsors before the need for sponsoring arises. Changing it midway
> doesn't help as one ends with many sponsors who didn't see enough
> contributions to build an opinion.

    I don't think there ought be a firm link between those who
review/sponsor one's work and those who advocate one's application to
join a team.  This is especially true for Contributing Developers, as
this application is about how well one interacts with the community,
and a demonstration of significant and sustained work, rather than a
technical review of one's expertise.  Those wishing to apply to be a
Contributing Developer should be able to demonstrate significant and
sustained work as outlined on their wiki page (perhaps with supporting
evidence from launchpad).  Once they have achived this, they ought
seek those other members of the community with whom they have
established rapport in various fora and ask for feedback on their
suitabliilty for application.  Once those that they work closely with
confirm, they should apply, listing these same existing members as
advocates.

    For applications to MOTU, this is a little more complicated, but
I'm still not sure there is a firm link.  Those who wish to be MOTU
have ideally already shown their suitability for Ubuntu Membership
(1), and so this is a more technical review.  As such, it is
preferable to have comments from those who have reviewed one's work.
In the vast majority of cases, one makes some mistakes as one learns,
and so will receive some feedback from various people (possibly in bug
reports), and asks questions (with discussion on the mailing lists or
on IRC).  It would be appropriate to select those existing MOTU with
whom one has held technical discussions as advocates for a MOTU
application, which may not be the same as those who sponsor one's work
(although it may be the same people).  Specifically searching to see
who sponsored one's work from the queue, and asking them to advocate
one's application without establishing a team relationship is awkward
for the possible advocates, and difficult for the prospective team
member.

    In summary, when you are new, talk to people (in person, on IRC,
in mailing lists).  Find people with whom you work well, and work with
them.  As you want to join teams, look to this group as your
advocates: they will be most likely to provide timely positive
responses, and help the progress.  When you encounter another who is
new, share the areas in which you work.  If there is common interest
and work style, work with them.  If they ask for advocacy, give your
honest opinion as to whether they should apply or wait, and if you
encourage application, support them when they do.

1: Although these can be reviewed and granted at the same time, it is
anticipated that most prospective developers will be able to become
part of the community (and eligible for Ubuntu Membership) prior to
developing sufficient technical mastery to be considered for MOTU.
Prominent exceptions would be e.g. existing Debian Developers (and
possibly Debian Maintainers) who may have the requisite skills, and so
for whom the primary barrier to MOTU would be the requirements for
Ubuntu Membership.

-- 
Emmet HIKORY



More information about the Motu-council mailing list