Improvements to the developer approval process

[Jono Bacon]

Hi All,

Firstly, apologies to the DMB for not including you in the original
discussion. I reached out to the TB because this is a general Ubuntu
technology policy discussion, but I should have included the DMB. It was
a rookie mistake, and I apologize.

Also, apologies because this mail is long. I tried to shorten it, and as
you can see, I failed. :-)

I also want to make it clear that I think our developer process is
generally very efficient and the DMB does a wonderful job. You folks and
the work you do is a credit to our community.

My feedback here is not about replacing the process or the DMB, but some
thoughts in which we can make the process a little more pleasant and
approachable for new candidates. This fits in with our goals to grow the
community and our developer-base.

I thought it could be useful to restart the thread with both the TB and
the DMB included. I have also been doing some more thinking on the
topic, and consulting with some of you further on the phone, and some of
the thoughts here have evolved from my mail to the TB.

A few people have asked for examples where these cases have occurred.
Some community members have indeed shared concerns with me privately
about areas in which they felt the developer approval process was a
little too heavyweight or intimidating, and I am conscious to respect
that privacy, but I think the issues I raise here are still of value
without the specific context.

I will begin by re-stating some of these challenges I see we face, and
some thoughts on a solution. None of these are big policy changes, and
none should result in increased bureaucracy.

> Challenges <

I see two primary areas that we could improve:

     1. There are two components in an assessment: the summary of work
        and the testimonials. Sometimes it appears that missing pieces
        from the body of work will overrule strong +1s from core-dev or
        MOTU developers in the testimonials. I trust our developers more
        than anyone, and I believe two strong recommendations from two
        respected developers should get someone most of the way to an
        approval.
     2. I think the process should be flipped in terms of assumptions of
        a new assessment. It can seem like applicants when meeting the
        board are assumed to start off with a series of -1s and they
        need to earn their +1s. I believe the process will be more
        positive if we assume success and find areas for improvement.
        This will give the candidate a feeling that the board has their
        success in mind and will outline a manifest of work for the
        candidate to focus on to achieve that success.

Fundamentally we always want to assess people based on their technical
capabilities, knowledge of Ubuntu, and their level of responsibility. I
believe improvements in the above two areas will make this process more
efficient.

> Possible Approach <

I would like to propose a few adjustments to how the DMB assesses
people:

      * Before The Application - today everyone is welcome to apply to
        be a developer. We should still provide this door in to people,
        but I recommend we strongly encourage that people only apply
        when another developer recommends them to. This would present
        two options for how they end up at an approval meeting:
              * Developer Recommendation - if an approved developer
                recommends they apply (which would infer a testimonial
                from that developer), the candidate should also strive
                to find another developer to +1 their application. The
                DMB would consider these developer-recommended
                applications (complete with two developer testimonials)
                with a high-probability of success.
              * Applicant Applies Out Of Free Will - if the applicant
                just decides to apply (without recommendation from an
                approved developer), the DMB should dig a little deeper
                into their application.
      * The Preparation - we should ask every applicant to provide their
        summary of work as we do today, but to strongly require
        testimonials from either core-dev or MOTU developers. An
        application with zero or one testimonial from a developer should
        not be reviewed.
      * The Assessment - the assessment will assume that the candidate
        is suitable to be an Ubuntu developer and work to find
        weaknesses that the applicant can focus on and assess of those
        weakness are strong enough to result in a -1. There are two ways
        of assessing the candidate:
              * Developer Recommendation - if a dev asks the applicant
                to apply and there are at least two strong testimonials
                from core-dev or MOTU applicants, the DMB should assume
                approval unless a valid reason for rejection can be
                found.
              * Applicant Applies Out Of Free Will - if the applicant
                applies on his/her own free will, more investigation
                should be made into their application (if there is a
                lack of developer testimonials). 
      * If a candidate is rejected, the DMB should provide a list of
        reasons and recommendations for methods in which these
        weaknesses can be addressed and a recommendation for when a
        re-evaluation could occur. This will provide a sense to the
        candidate that we want them to succeed and we will advise in
        areas in which they can resolve issues.

So, in a nutshell, if the DMB has an application and the applicant was
asked by a developer to apply for approval, and there are two
testimonials from devs, we can reasonably assume they are likely to get
approved. Any areas of weakness would be noted as action items for
improvement with a recommended plan for meeting those needs.

I think if we encourage the above approach and that people apply when we
recommend them to, it will increase the success rate of applications and
we will see fewer DMB rejections, as we will see better and more
equipped candidates applying.

Apologies for this being so long.

Thoughts?

	Jono

-- 
Jono Bacon
Ubuntu Community Manager
jono(at)ubuntu(dot)com
www.ubuntu.com : www.jonobacon.org
www.twitter.com/jonobacon : www.identi.ca/jonobacon