Developer Application Board

Daniel Holbach daniel.holbach at
Wed Jul 15 08:57:35 BST 2009

Hash: SHA1

Scott James Remnant schrieb:
> The initial membership of this new board will be the current membership
> of the Technical Board, and the Technical Board will appoint and approve
> future membership.
> To start with, this board will take over administration of the
> ubuntu-core-dev team from the Technical Board, reviewing and approving
> applications for upload rights to the "main" and "restricted"
> components of Ubuntu.
> Over time, the new board would like to work with the MOTU Council to
> expand its membership so that it can deal with applications to the
> "universe" and "multiverse" components of Ubuntu as well, or the
> equivalent package sets after archive reorganisation.

As I see it, the current process the MOTU Council is using
( was discussed and improved
through several iterations and is working really out well. It has been
the biggest responsibility of the MOTU Council.

Looking at the current process the biggest wart we could fix is that
core-dev and per-package uploaders are discussed twice: first by the MC,
second by the TB.

I would have imagined that the new Board would be there to fix this
issue and have expected some kind of merger, but maybe I'm just
misunderstanding things.

> The new board will use a private mailing list to discuss applications
> ensuring the confidentiality of discussion between the applicant and the
> board.  This will prevent any critique from becoming a matter of public
> record, which has been raised as a concern where (for example) a future
> employer searches for information about an individual on the web.
> Applications will be accepted by e-mail to this private mailing list in
> much the same form as the wiki pages currently used by applicants today.

Why not stick to ? I
really think we should aim for one process for developer applications.
One wiki template to fill out for any kind of application, one Board and
a public meeting.

I'm with Matthew East on the issue of transparency, I personally feel
that the "quick summary" is not enough. I get lots of questions by new
developers who want to know "Am I ready yet? Can I apply already?"
Having public applications and application meeting logs available helps
them a lot to understand what's expected of them.

A minor point, but I don't like the name to be honest. "Developer
Application Board" might confuse people to think they could go there and
discuss if f-spot should really replace gthumb. "Developer Membership
Board" (similiar to the Regional Membership Boards) might work, but I
guess there's more creative people than me. Also the abbreviation DAB
doesn't work: it's a German beer I don't like much. :-)

Thanks a lot for thinking about the future direction of applications.

Have a great day,
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


More information about the Motu-council mailing list