Re: New MOTU: Martin-Éric Racine - Recommendation for Per-Package Upload rights: xserver-xorg-video-geode
Martin-Éric Racine
q-funk at ubuntu.com
Thu Jan 7 10:53:49 GMT 2010
Hello everyone,
As I found out today, it seems that the recommendation to grant me
main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode was never acted upon.
Could this be fixed?
Thanks!
Martin-Éric
2009/9/10 Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>:
> Hello everybody,
>
> because we were unable to get quorum due to holidays, travelling and
> other imponderables we resorted to the mailing list to figure out this
> applications.
>
> The MOTU Council approves Martin-Éric Racine for MOTU membership.
>
> In addition to that we recommend him for upload rights for
> xserver-xorg-video-geode.
>
> Application: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine
>
> Votes in favour: Daniel Holbach, Jonathan Davies, Michael Bienia, Søren
> Hansen, Richard Johnson.
>
> Voting emails attached to this mail, because the lists.ubuntu.com
> archives decided to drop emails from Søren Hansen and Richard Johnson...
> maybe others too.
>
> Have a great day,
> Daniel
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Martin-Éric Racine" <martin-eric.racine at iki.fi>
> To: motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 12:41:26 +0300
> Subject: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> Greetings,
>
> I'll be showing up at the August 27th MOTU Council meeting to apply
> for the following:
>
> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>
> My wiki page is at:
>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine
>
> Best Regards,
> Martin-Éric
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> To: martin-eric.racine at iki.fi
> Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 17:22:23 +0200
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> Am Dienstag, den 25.08.2009, 12:41 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
>> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>>
>> My wiki page is at:
>>
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine
>
> A few questions:
>
> * I must admit I'm a bit confused. In the topic you mention
> xserver-xorg-video-geode, above it's three questions already and
> on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine/MOTUApplication you
> say that you apply for MOTU plus the packages above. What is
> accurate now?
> * You mention Byzantine bureaucracy. Which examples do you have
> and how you attempt to improve the situation there?
> * How do you think we can get better at the ratio of bugs that are
> dealt with?
> * There's a couple of bugs that were not dealt with at
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-pdf and
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/planner - what do you
> think would make the status quo better?
> * Which packages apart from the ones above did you work on in
> Ubuntu?
> * I noticed that you are active in Debian as well. Are you
> pursuing Debian Developer membership too? How's that coming on?
>
> Have a great day,
> Daniel
>
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Richard JOHNSON <nixternal at ubuntu.com>
> To: Martin-Éric Racine <martin-eric.racine at iki.fi>
> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 10:34:42 -0500
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:41:26PM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I'll be showing up at the August 27th MOTU Council meeting to apply
>> for the following:
>>
>> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
>> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>
> So, are you going for Per Package Upload rights only, or are you going for
> MOTU?
>
> If you are going for MOTU, do you plan on working on other packages besides
> the 2 that you listed?
>
> On the upload rights for -geode, I don't see many problems as it seems from
> the comments you have been doing a good job on it. How about bug reports,
> how are you handling those?
>
> --
> Name| Richard JOHNSON
> Title| Developer
> WWW| http://www.ubuntu.com
> Email| nixternal at ubuntu.com
> GnuPG| 3578 0981 A21D D662 2A96 7623 F4C1 838C D8C4 4738
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJKn+ISAAoJEPTBg4zYxEc4dHkP/RP8Pz2tq+3Jm5Toc9JOtCCU
> ndKUnmZt1WiCTyvtNJ3KX4nkpZAO23VAhJE9PGMcNtvxbDQrIhVx/JdlIFVS7soT
> A9sDDnpDWEIo/LQ+Hp97uSt8WhjgbDzUl91eefj7/QR2FwDvxZ0R/UVc8RHEq9IQ
> KjeXoxsdie2yfs6guBWBSQzTAOYVKp+WP7OpXqsp4Atda4/q7DFotJz3gsm8HohG
> JXXPWbNE2+0i37P7Hb6fUNrfE+h/D21ba306UEYFvy9ImFLr3evXhQCVHqsLE3ai
> 8NHBuSQv0kWJL78GLU+3bz1tFaahE/I+gUPn/CJM/NIayTraHfApNsnSL00gJhaJ
> EgzuWtC/5n3AoxgtpKn3szijJBR7HuiZ6+YKMpQQpkmFveNLYijvnMmnqvGMVT2Q
> cO+sJCoNDnjZJOKiByG8TxLRJ8Bvkvt6vDMZDj9TC0Y1n4ETNm9JIfgHcRlQvs+V
> TfvplEcKJXS2ba1GVX8aNtD3gqtccVOvqC4jtgWYuLLhiwnh5++iCfLArg0ZG1DK
> l4c9biqmwCpJldWCOzY28IUaqnwkCbZpimPhdqMdkplqxCl/vkfp9PUKbbddpRuy
> W2zGDUJNSeF7hJ+lA/MJT6uMQ/axCCTPZXZMWSPri7Aqxlgc0j3ZstOe2sGqOujS
> 97TS3K70whqx5v0fQ+Dh
> =9U5p
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Martin-Éric Racine" <q-funk at ubuntu.com>
> To: Richard JOHNSON <nixternal at ubuntu.com>
> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 18:48:55 +0300
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> 2009/9/3 Richard JOHNSON <nixternal at ubuntu.com>:
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:41:26PM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> I'll be showing up at the August 27th MOTU Council meeting to apply
>>> for the following:
>>>
>>> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
>>> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>>
>> So, are you going for Per Package Upload rights only, or are you going for
>> MOTU?
>
> Please see my reply to Daniel Holbach. I'm going for MOTU, but I'll
> also need PPU for xserver-xorg-video-geode, which is in main.
>
>> If you are going for MOTU, do you plan on working on other packages besides
>> the 2 that you listed?
>
> I occasionally submit patches to other packages, whenever I encounter
> a bug that I can fix. I'm also loosely involved in various teams
> (lubuntu, X, apt-zeroconf), where I commit changes every once in a
> while.
>
>> On the upload rights for -geode, I don't see many problems as it seems from
>> the comments you have been doing a good job on it. How about bug reports,
>> how are you handling those?
>
> I'm fairly quick at acknowledging new bugs and asking initial
> questions, but the cause for any particular bug sometimes escapes me
> for ages, especially if it specifically affects Geode variants for
> which I lack hardware to test with. This was the case with the ongoing
> GX2 crash issues that was just fixed a couple of days ago.
>
> Martin-Éric
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Richard JOHNSON <nixternal at ubuntu.com>
> To: Martin-Éric Racine <q-funk at ubuntu.com>
> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 13:14:40 -0500
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 06:44:57PM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
>> I tried ages ago, but I have found that I lack the motivation to go though NM.
>
> You and I both :)
>
> --
> Name| Richard JOHNSON
> Title| Developer
> WWW| http://www.ubuntu.com
> Email| nixternal at ubuntu.com
> GnuPG| 3578 0981 A21D D662 2A96 7623 F4C1 838C D8C4 4738
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJKoAeQAAoJEPTBg4zYxEc4s2sP/3XlXs9wdq7lId4W4l4BNDY4
> MFfnFM6M7dUmpSqBHepOI8Img+GSD0p3Vjx3sERUyltypQv+K4Z5jET0TQtezHwu
> acZaJtCDGVIcL2y6YErRKFU3/FwPA/xDO2il4NqapRVk1CBsk5cW3E1BiuQH58h5
> J6xTvl8SK14z/jOXzTanh45R9Km4Ept+GAEBj7G97orzt6Z6xaCIWB3gdWhjNJ9d
> Gfe3AtogfgVuoP6AYBTl0BSF3LziDrJjOgdaX7fx/OJ7UXtqdXCWh6L6SRGoi0f8
> 2aQd/yQKB/Z32kElE3ckUKSQ++dtOuEq+C4HByPjzsRBQMawlZohWZgYsTG7rsZp
> 9gTo+uOIBgPkdeife4R/DENBCL66GtW6Q2km73U/qvVPpydQG77dePgRWR6KakN7
> mEr3gWRoyXSm/uZIKUvdXiAtUs8R3j2YtkZOyEz5RHhw5vXPFcTwKU21puUPKEuK
> PdslzoREbsvmLqZk6Ro8m3yR740hW3HFOLov6Gi9DaRf/1PCuqzfVOzYfJlzGiFs
> vHuy+J1zpC10MFGovmZ29A8GXWWk6s28Buf0wlJkPeMuJ/72Xau5x9WqeWF2xmF8
> nFUubzWQTh593LFe+awY02UYPeq9wKuQM3YgQCAxPpNK0HwIJITZ4G5EYwdH72y2
> 0Qi8h93zfdg7hc6GMU6/
> =Ttqs
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> To: q-funk at ubuntu.com
> Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 08:28:29 +0200
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> Am Donnerstag, den 03.09.2009, 18:44 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>> For instance, the information I provided
>> to become an Ubuntu member is nearly identical to the one asked now
>> for this MOTU Application. Why should we need a separate template
>> then?
>
> The application template for a Contributing Developer (which is Ubuntu
> membership approved by MOTU Council) is identical to the template for
> per-package uploader, MOTU or core-dev.
>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers
>
>
>> As for CUPS-PDF, there have been mainly two issues:
>>
>> 1) Persistent user requests to turn a printer driver into a GUI tool
>> that allows selecting where to save the PDF file. I've had to mark
>> these as WONTFIX and explain how this wishlist bug simply doesn't fit
>> the mandate of a printer driver. Anyhow, as Till Kampetter repeatedly
>> pointed out in response, both GTK2 and QT have built-in PDF export
>> functionality, which pretty much makes the request moot.
>>
>> 2) ApprArmor issues. I haven't found enough documentation on AppArmor
>> to intervene. Still, it has to be said that AppArmor is poorly
>> documented. However, I've been in constant contact with Martin Pitt,
>> who is the main person responsible for AppArmor issues in Ubuntu. He
>> has been very helpful is solving AppArmor-specific issues and
>> suggesting fixes.
>
> There's a number of bug reports in
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-pdf that don't fall into
> these categories and have no answer. I'm not apportioning blame, it's
> just that you criticised how Ubuntu does not receive enough bug love and
> that https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#PerPackage requires
> "effective bug management" of the packages in question.
>
>
>> I tried ages ago, but I have found that I lack the motivation to go though NM.
>
> It just surprised me as you are maintaining these packages in Debian for
> so long already. :)
>
> Have a great day,
> Daniel
>
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Martin-Éric Racine" <q-funk at ubuntu.com>
> To: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 18:44:57 +0300
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Daniel Holbach<daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> Am Dienstag, den 25.08.2009, 12:41 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>>> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
>>> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>>>
>>> My wiki page is at:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine
>>
>> A few questions:
>>
>> * I must admit I'm a bit confused. In the topic you mention
>> xserver-xorg-video-geode, above it's three questions already and
>> on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine/MOTUApplication you
>> say that you apply for MOTU plus the packages above. What is
>> accurate now?
>
> After talking to several Ubuntu developers, we came to the conclusion
> that mere upload rights for specific packages would be pointlessly
> limiting, as I have been maintaining packages at Debian since 2003,
> and that MOTU would be better for me. However, one of my pet packages
> is in main, so I'd need separate upload rights for that one.
>
>> * You mention Byzantine bureaucracy. Which examples do you have
>> and how you attempt to improve the situation there?
>
> The distinction between Canonical and Ubuntu is often blurry and
> getting a straight answer about who handles what is often challenging.
> Having to duplicate existing information and remix it gets tedious
> too. One improvement I'd feel necessary is to merge the templates
> used for several processes. For instance, the information I provided
> to become an Ubuntu member is nearly identical to the one asked now
> for this MOTU Application. Why should we need a separate template
> then?
>
>> * How do you think we can get better at the ratio of bugs that are
>> dealt with?
>
> In some cases, such as the kernel team and X team, recruiting more
> full-time developers on the Canonical side would be necessary.
> Otherwise, people end up providing pictures of kernel crashes for
> nothing, since nobody will ever get around investigating them.
>
>> * There's a couple of bugs that were not dealt with at
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-pdf and
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/planner - what do you
>> think would make the status quo better?
>
> I haven't been involved with Planner in ages so I won't comment on this one.
>
> As for CUPS-PDF, there have been mainly two issues:
>
> 1) Persistent user requests to turn a printer driver into a GUI tool
> that allows selecting where to save the PDF file. I've had to mark
> these as WONTFIX and explain how this wishlist bug simply doesn't fit
> the mandate of a printer driver. Anyhow, as Till Kampetter repeatedly
> pointed out in response, both GTK2 and QT have built-in PDF export
> functionality, which pretty much makes the request moot.
>
> 2) ApprArmor issues. I haven't found enough documentation on AppArmor
> to intervene. Still, it has to be said that AppArmor is poorly
> documented. However, I've been in constant contact with Martin Pitt,
> who is the main person responsible for AppArmor issues in Ubuntu. He
> has been very helpful is solving AppArmor-specific issues and
> suggesting fixes.
>
>> * Which packages apart from the ones above did you work on in
>> Ubuntu?
>
> I've been involved in CUPS and in [i|my|a]spell dictionaries for
> Estonian, Latvian and Russian, on and off. I also regularly file bugs
> and attach patches for everyone else's packages, whenever the issue
> seems obvious enough that I can fix it myself.
>
>> * I noticed that you are active in Debian as well. Are you
>> pursuing Debian Developer membership too? How's that coming on?
>
> I tried ages ago, but I have found that I lack the motivation to go though NM.
>
> Martin-Éric
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> To: q-funk at ubuntu.com
> Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 10:46:58 +0200
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> Am Freitag, den 04.09.2009, 11:09 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>> Thank goodness, at least, procedures are usually
>> well-documented at Ubuntu, even though it sometimes takes ages of
>> following through the maze of renamed or obsolete documents on the
>> wiki, before one finds the right answer. ;)
>
> Which pages did you stumble upon? What needs fixing?
>
>
>> Would anybody object, then, if I merge the contents of
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine/MOTUApplication into
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine and use that as my generic
>> application for various things?
>
> As long as all the necessary information plus sponsor's feedback and
> detailed information is there I doubt anybody objects to a specific URL.
>
> Have a great day,
> Daniel
>
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Martin-Éric Racine" <q-funk at ubuntu.com>
> To: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 11:09:55 +0300
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Daniel Holbach<daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> Am Donnerstag, den 03.09.2009, 18:44 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>>> For instance, the information I provided
>>> to become an Ubuntu member is nearly identical to the one asked now
>>> for this MOTU Application. Why should we need a separate template
>>> then?
>>
>> The application template for a Contributing Developer (which is Ubuntu
>> membership approved by MOTU Council) is identical to the template for
>> per-package uploader, MOTU or core-dev.
>>
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers
>
> Interesting. People only mentioned the sort of info they wanted to
> see, back then; they didn't point to a specific template. In a sense,
> I'm thankful, because you're pretty systematic about pointing out such
> things. :)
>
> Of course, several things at Ubuntu that were previously informal have
> become more formalized over time, which is a good thing. The drawback
> of formalizing things is that they inexorably become caught into
> procedural pedantism. Thank goodness, at least, procedures are usually
> well-documented at Ubuntu, even though it sometimes takes ages of
> following through the maze of renamed or obsolete documents on the
> wiki, before one finds the right answer. ;)
>
> Would anybody object, then, if I merge the contents of
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine/MOTUApplication into
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine and use that as my generic
> application for various things?
>
>>> As for CUPS-PDF, there have been mainly two issues:
>>>
>>> 1) Persistent user requests to turn a printer driver into a GUI tool
>>> that allows selecting where to save the PDF file. I've had to mark
>>> these as WONTFIX and explain how this wishlist bug simply doesn't fit
>>> the mandate of a printer driver. Anyhow, as Till Kampetter repeatedly
>>> pointed out in response, both GTK2 and QT have built-in PDF export
>>> functionality, which pretty much makes the request moot.
>>>
>>> 2) ApprArmor issues. I haven't found enough documentation on AppArmor
>>> to intervene. Still, it has to be said that AppArmor is poorly
>>> documented. However, I've been in constant contact with Martin Pitt,
>>> who is the main person responsible for AppArmor issues in Ubuntu. He
>>> has been very helpful is solving AppArmor-specific issues and
>>> suggesting fixes.
>>
>> There's a number of bug reports in
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cups-pdf that don't fall into
>> these categories and have no answer. I'm not apportioning blame, it's
>> just that you criticised how Ubuntu does not receive enough bug love and
>> that https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#PerPackage requires
>> "effective bug management" of the packages in question.
>
> UPP indeed does and if you look at my work for Geode in main, you'll
> find that I'm also active upstream, directly committing fixes into the
> X.org git repository, whenever applicable. You'll also find that I've
> been maintaining backports via my PPA as a staging area for pending
> SRU.
>
> For CUPS-PDF, I'l openly admit that I got bored with the endless
> stream of requests similar to type 1 and type 2. I've thus enjoyed a
> rather egalitarian collaboration on these with Till Kamppeter, who is
> equally involved in CUPS-PDF on the Ubuntu side, largely because he
> contributed many of the betterments that were later merged into Debian
> and he knows them best, and also because, since he is the upstream
> maintainer for several other printing-related packages, he possesses a
> top-level perspective that I sometimes lack. It's a nice synergy.
>
> You were asking about what other packages I work on and I'd say that
> much of the work I do is completely in the shadows, sometimes reduced
> to simply reminding Till or Martin Pitt about a pending CUPS issue, by
> discussing possible solutions with them over IRC, solutions that, most
> of the time, they are the ones to commit and release later on. I don't
> live for taking the credit and I'm okay with that arrangement, even if
> it means that my contributions might sometimes be less obvious.
>
>>> I tried ages ago, but I have found that I lack the motivation to go though NM.
>>
>> It just surprised me as you are maintaining these packages in Debian for
>> so long already. :)
>
> I suppose that, since my interest is mostly in maintaining a few
> specific packages and doing that well (if we momentarily discount my
> habit to attach patches to bug reports I file against other people's
> packages), the whole idea of jumping through hoops and enduring the
> hazing that is so typical at Debian, just to get around acquiring
> upload privileges for a few packages, wasn't my cup of tea. :)
>
> Martin-Éric
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Soren Hansen <soren at ubuntu.com>
> To: motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 16:47:54 +0200
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
>> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
>> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>>
>> My wiki page is at:
>>
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine
>
> Based on your feedback in this thread, I'm convinced that you will do a
> good job as both a MOTU and maintaining xserver-xorg-video-geode.
>
> +1 from me.
>
> Please don't hesitate to point out and/or propose changes if you find
> too much bureaucracy in Ubuntu.
>
> --
> Soren Hansen |
> Lead virtualisation engineer | Ubuntu Server Team
> Canonical Ltd. | http://www.ubuntu.com/
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJKpR0ZAAoJEA//+D0NxV3GSygL/3qbhqk3hhsVCF25A8JA65cS
> pgo/zDNuVFIfzXmafOzTTKngYB4fZP4EXvaIYgaY8Fhcc48GLuCHCZMAoFrkZZ4L
> UbMqznYM1KGOHFuOjE2bXVa00sf0bLDO8S1BgV+M/oBzfodUcWlj+HJKwBOVsl+3
> H9VT6BXIBrxwafLLwPXqgSGAhsriSYtqD7tgfpULwaMQdZmWdldsRSxij6GaTWyA
> IjUC/Sf1nJDolLkfDYX3GZ+huASxwJy71nspoR+ehfTmrGgS77Bt+4P830Pz/6c2
> frJZZGZPuYm4WvBOGvRFE7efkvMUR3UburA2+h+uWnsB+zBR4wF7gvhlcDTHk27u
> 4YFTlhK7Iwd1WukrEdUwXlF47SZ1869AZ8JlLt1/1sCzkLKUf/W2e+xCh6X+eYbq
> RS3NaH6VA/6SXRgac2shXaTX1x8uFg86mO/L17zpj++8IHpV7L8vst5IVkm0oUcV
> cWVL0BtuZupBrTb7e4wjTechzmuMryVsIAF8U5vc7A==
> =aDYO
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Jonathan Davies <jpds at ubuntu.com>
> To: motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:29:30 +0100
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> 2009/9/7 Soren Hansen <soren at ubuntu.com>:
>>> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
>>> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>>>
>>> My wiki page is at:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine
>>
>> Based on your feedback in this thread, I'm convinced that you will do a
>> good job as both a MOTU and maintaining xserver-xorg-video-geode.
>>
>> +1 from me.
>
> +1 from me too.
>
> Cheers,
> Jonathan
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Richard JOHNSON <nixternal at ubuntu.com>
> To: Martin-Éric Racine <martin-eric.racine at iki.fi>
> Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 19:38:31 -0500
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> +1 from me!
>
> --
> Name| Richard JOHNSON
> Title| Developer
> WWW| http://www.ubuntu.com
> Email| nixternal at ubuntu.com
> GnuPG| 3578 0981 A21D D662 2A96 7623 F4C1 838C D8C4 4738
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJKpvkGAAoJEPTBg4zYxEc4Ij4QAKXgSHlhcK5yzPRdGt1RwQT1
> 7lA7WiH4gnQEEWrA/22aPFo6A8TujNOkRG+Vg387emRqzU5ocsqFgMlO3rfNCuv9
> 0XzAzEJYLpoJ7jJ18ycHGmrowR9THwQk3hS38GW4OSlvIRQD5yoKLI4x30akkaZ1
> 6emaTGsuxQ6YLVdPjl+DePctbsIJmhyeyWyoX260SkWQsqWD7PDpkoKjiYy30LW5
> pbZmI5UivpRtcnP2Sb0iq3LBO7gxXG051gkg8VNvHSe0c1aSPeOwUvfsjfkq3NQR
> V6Ol/IeYla/C3uG+ZZ9zKU/jS9eWfU6beaAPoyhT94sPSxkcqajWnb5zifLbFHWx
> T+IhajnZ4fWpcjqcfayhChQF5E/1++MvMAAsu+dlW9g0xTV11ZT/Ei4ma2VzfvMk
> vahHUIWLWK7ut9s3b56mPnuL9lZenctSTJREbhk5Dju9DVzLgmI1fS6FJmzFwjkv
> utjiRA7PnJENDm3c/G2vrJWyBRtLferSoWvSehZdNtWOfe6xMeQn5WBc5zzIrycL
> Mjg/g90M9NYOvgE3RhQ8n0i7L+XE+YHe2+LaMhtha+6ceB/g2b9FCkFf3I46Crbd
> XWY5wr0QfSrIh7y1GW4qBifqrpDtBA+9xbZRoUq1ZQJTF8uc83/YlqOqVXjh8t/8
> yB3YbqZJK5j0N54Bi/iX
> =Jo4c
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> To: martin-eric.racine at iki.fi
> Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 10:45:54 +0200
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> Am Dienstag, den 25.08.2009, 12:41 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>> I'll be showing up at the August 27th MOTU Council meeting to apply
>> for the following:
>>
>> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
>> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>>
>> My wiki page is at:
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MartinEricRacine
>
> You mentioned your dislike for some of Ubuntu's bureaucracy before. I
> just had a look at a few of your bug reports... some of them a bit
> older:
>
> * Syncs that weren't checked:
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/417518
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/397363
> * No sponsor subscription:
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/421790
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/66823
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/66822
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/66821
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/61427
> * Pointless sync:
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/280157
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/130618
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/120203
> * Freeze problems:
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/241803
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/193746
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/132105
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/130620
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/65972
> * Build not tested:
> * https://launchpad.net/bugs/219109
>
> Don't get me wrong: I'm not blaming your for making mistakes, we all do
> and if you have a look in Launchpad, you'll see that I did quite a few
> myself. Also am I not blaming you for preferring to "just" sync your
> changes from Debian.
>
> What I do wonder is how well you feel yourself connected to the Ubuntu
> Development team and how well you think you're up to date on processes,
> freezes and everything we assume that Ubuntu Developers should know.
>
> Also I'm interested to hear what you think should be easier and what
> your suggestions for change are.
>
> Have a great day,
> Daniel
>
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> To: q-funk at ubuntu.com
> Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:31:54 +0200
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> Am Mittwoch, den 09.09.2009, 18:04 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>> I think one specific aspect that remains unclear to me is the
>> distinction between what should go into an SRU, versus what should
>> preferably go into a backport. Right now, the impression I get is that
>> backports should be avoided, if only because the backport team has a
>> very nasty stance that one should "at least *try* getting your fix
>> approved as an SRU first and only come to us if it was denied, or else
>> we're gonna ignore you and kill baby kittens." That feels vague and
>> pointlessly rude. It also projects a rather sad idea of Ubuntu's
>> willingness to backport anything. I wonder why.
>
> I get the feeling you got the wrong impression here. We are very picky
> about what gets into an SRU, but are more lax about backports.
>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports#How%20to%20request%
> 20new%20packages
>
>
>
>> Likewise, looking for info about how to become an Ubuntu developer, I
>> found several pages that start by saying that the instructions are
>> elsewhere and yet still go ahead and try to explain what *was* the
>> process, before templates and other more formal approaches were
>> adopted.
>>
>> I think that what I mean is that a lot of wiki content needs to be
>> periodically janitored and mothballed in a systematic way.
>
> Which pages? It'd be nice if you brought up what exactly needs fixing so
> we can start doing it right now. ubuntu-motu at lists.u.c or ubuntu-devel@
> is totally fine for that.
>
>
>> However, most of the time, only people who are directly involved in
>> the process or project concerned by a given wiki page know what and
>> where the most up-to-date information is, which is why I seldom dare
>> mark any content as obsolete by myself.
>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment and
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/KnowledgeBase should give a
> very good overview over the "important stuff".
>
>
>> In a similar way, I'm pretty much the only person in Ubuntu who knows
>> 100% what is the current status of xf86-video-geode in all releases
>> since Hardy, which bugs have been fixed in which upstream version,
>> which changes fix what bug, what commit could potentially be
>> cherry-picked for an SRU, etc. As such, I pretty much systematically
>> document these issues in LP bugs, upstream README and Debian
>> ChangeLogs, such as in https://launchpad.net/bugs/423866 and
>> essentially try to maintain a tidy ship and leave as little lint
>> behind me as possible.
>
> Do you think it would make sense to document a "checklist" for people
> who want to "adopt an upstream" and give them some guidance?
>
> Have a great day,
> Daniel
>
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Martin-Éric Racine" <q-funk at ubuntu.com>
> To: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 18:55:26 +0300
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Daniel Holbach<daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, den 09.09.2009, 18:04 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>> I get the feeling you got the wrong impression here. We are very picky
>> about what gets into an SRU, but are more lax about backports.
>>
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
>> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports#How%20to%20request%
>> 20new%20packages
>
> Interesting. That could solve the issue for GX2 support in Hardy.
>
>>> Likewise, looking for info about how to become an Ubuntu developer, I
>>> found several pages that start by saying that the instructions are
>>> elsewhere and yet still go ahead and try to explain what *was* the
>>> process, before templates and other more formal approaches were
>>> adopted.
>>>
>>> I think that what I mean is that a lot of wiki content needs to be
>>> periodically janitored and mothballed in a systematic way.
>>
>> Which pages? It'd be nice if you brought up what exactly needs fixing so
>> we can start doing it right now. ubuntu-motu at lists.u.c or ubuntu-devel@
>> is totally fine for that.
>
> Argh, it has been several weeks since I last checked those. I should
> have made a note of which ones, back then.
>
>
>>> However, most of the time, only people who are directly involved in
>>> the process or project concerned by a given wiki page know what and
>>> where the most up-to-date information is, which is why I seldom dare
>>> mark any content as obsolete by myself.
>>
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment and
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/KnowledgeBase should give a
>> very good overview over the "important stuff".
>
> Right, I was referring to the LTSP pages as an exemple. In that
> particular case, back then, only Oliver Grawert knew for sure what is
> up-to-date about LTSP on the Ubuntu wiki.
>
>>> In a similar way, I'm pretty much the only person in Ubuntu who knows
>>> 100% what is the current status of xf86-video-geode in all releases
>>> since Hardy, which bugs have been fixed in which upstream version,
>>> which changes fix what bug, what commit could potentially be
>>> cherry-picked for an SRU, etc. As such, I pretty much systematically
>>> document these issues in LP bugs, upstream README and Debian
>>> ChangeLogs, such as in https://launchpad.net/bugs/423866 and
>>> essentially try to maintain a tidy ship and leave as little lint
>>> behind me as possible.
>>
>> Do you think it would make sense to document a "checklist" for people
>> who want to "adopt an upstream" and give them some guidance?
>
> This could indeed be useful to document, as the methodology for
> getting involved upstream or with Debian is fairly similar and
> provides equally rewarding dividents. I suppose that documenting how I
> got involved with xf86-video-geode and what I learned from that
> process would provide a good starting point.
>
> Martin-Éric
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com>
> To: q-funk at ubuntu.com
> Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 18:26:17 +0200
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> Am Mittwoch, den 09.09.2009, 18:55 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>> Argh, it has been several weeks since I last checked those. I should
>> have made a note of which ones, back then.
>
> It's important that we as a team have a culture of fixing this and
> discussing it instead of going "ah ok, it's that broken old junk again"
> and letting things like this one slip.
>
>
>> This could indeed be useful to document, as the methodology for
>> getting involved upstream or with Debian is fairly similar and
>> provides equally rewarding dividents. I suppose that documenting how I
>> got involved with xf86-video-geode and what I learned from that
>> process would provide a good starting point.
>
> I'd appreciate if you could start separate discussion with jorge at
> ubuntu dot com and me about this.
>
> +1 from me.
>
> Have a great day,
> Daniel
>
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Scott Kitterman <ubuntu at kitterman.com>
> To: motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:03:00 -0400
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:31:54 +0200 Daniel Holbach <daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>Am Mittwoch, den 09.09.2009, 18:04 +0300 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
>>> I think one specific aspect that remains unclear to me is the
>>> distinction between what should go into an SRU, versus what should
>>> preferably go into a backport. Right now, the impression I get is that
>>> backports should be avoided, if only because the backport team has a
>>> very nasty stance that one should "at least *try* getting your fix
>>> approved as an SRU first and only come to us if it was denied, or else
>>> we're gonna ignore you and kill baby kittens." That feels vague and
>>> pointlessly rude. It also projects a rather sad idea of Ubuntu's
>>> willingness to backport anything. I wonder why.
>>
>>I get the feeling you got the wrong impression here. We are very picky
>>about what gets into an SRU, but are more lax about backports.
>>
>>https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
>>https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports#How%20to%20request%
>>20new%20packages
>>
> Backports are not for getting critical bug fixes delivered to users. Because the backports process is easier to get through (it's not enabled by default and so the test requirements are not as thorough), allowing SRU candidate fixes into backports would undermine the SRU process and deprive users who haven't opt-ed in to the more aggressive approach of backports of the fixes.
>
> Personally, I don't find following the tech board direction for backports "nasty" at all.
>
> Scott K
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Michael Bienia" <michael at bienia.de>
> To: motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Date: 10 Sep 2009 15:00:52 +0200
> Subject: Re: application: main upload rights for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> On 2009-08-25 12:41:26 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
>> I'll be showing up at the August 27th MOTU Council meeting to apply
>> for the following:
>>
>> upload rights to main (xserver-xorg-video-geode)
>> upload rights to universe (cups-pdf, upgrade-system)
>
> +1 for xserver-xorg-video-geode
> +1 for MOTU
>
> Michael
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iJwEAQEDAAYFAkqo+H0ACgkQo8/XfXdugup7zQP/SvELcthvgNSn7roEt3E/jnH8
> 8VVIbXiSvz1AHQBs07qt8C6lVbqESXgtCdvYTJ02BJg+ZHdvLsRail6v+Xr7Uh1b
> Mq80opwDGirB1yQuhOWTS+kc72Kw2WDaThdEIgbYZ/0oo5ukX28X4bpzYxvY7OPx
> k7bKdOYJlbiF16IvdmU=
> =2yyW
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> Motu-council mailing list
> Motu-council at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/motu-council
>
>
More information about the Motu-council
mailing list