Considering component-specific work when reviewing applications (Was: MOTU Application for kirkland)

Michael Bienia michael at
Tue Aug 19 13:28:27 BST 2008

On 2008-08-15 23:58:48 +0900, Emmet Hikory wrote:
> Soren Hansen wrote:
> > I've ranted about this before, and I still fail to see the importance of
> > this. For the purpose of this discussion, I think the component to which
> > a package belongs is completely and utterly arbitrary. Packages get
> > moved from main to universe and vice versa all the time.  At least my
> > own interest in a package is not determined by whether it's in main or
> > universe (multiverse is a slightly different discussion :) ). It just so
> > happens that most of the packages I care about are in main. If they got
> > demoted to universe, I doubt I'd automatically lose interest in them.

As MOTUship isn't required for core-dev since some time, I see MOTU and
core-dev nearly at the same level (with core-dev with a little higher
bars). So we should give applications (who apply from some upload right,
be it MOTU or core-dev), who have the technical skills and the needed
trust from the community, the needed upload rights they need to continue
their work they were doing till now.

As currently the upload rights are determined by the component a package
is in, IMHO we should look at the packages an applicant is interested
in. I see no advantage making someone a MOTU who is interested in a set
of package which is mainly in main, just because he has the technical
skills and the trust needed for MOTU. If the applicant's sponsors are
ready to support the application because they're confident that he can
work unsupervised, he should apply for upload rights which match his
current (and future) work at best.


More information about the Motu-council mailing list