"Support Plan" request challenge (WAS: Ubuntu Studio LTS Re-Qualification)

[Erich Eickmeyer]

Hi Seb,

On 11/24/23 06:40, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
>
> Hey Erich,
>
> I'm a relatively new member of the TB and not familiar with how 
> flavors were granted LTS status in the past but let me share my 
> perspective on what you wrote.
>
> Le 24/11/2023 à 07:02, Erich Eickmeyer a écrit :
>>
>> That said, this seems way too detailed for a repeated LTS. I will 
>> certainly follow this for Edubuntu since it's returning after 10 
>> years, but for Ubuntu Studio, and any other flavor with a prior LTS 
>> in the past two years, this should be a much lower bar.
>>
> Checking 
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2016-April/002213.html 
> what I see in this example is 7 bullet points and less than 20 lines 
> of text (wrapped at 80chars), that doesn't seem a long or unachievable 
> task to me. Could you be a specifics on what exactly is making the bar 
> too high in your opinion?
> To me it feels like it would have taken you less time to write those 
> details than those emails...
>
I wasn't made aware of that email until Steve's reply, so I had no 
example to work from. Furthermore, this wasn't just about me as this 
affects all flavors. I've spoken to others who have been blindsided by 
this requirement that have been release managers for their respective 
flavors for as long as I have.
>
>> That said, I'm not standing-down from this challenge, but revising 
>> it: I challenge the Technical Board to revisit and more clearly 
>> define exactly what "Flavor's support plan presented to Tech Board 
>> and approved; support planshould indicate period of time if beyond 18 
>> months (3yrs or 5yr), keycontacts, and setting expectations as to 
>> level of support." means with specifics, as the wording is too vague. 
>> Furthermore, the policy wording is clearly outdated ("18 months"), 
>> has been around too long without revision (2011) and the policy 
>> itself should probably be reworked in collaboration with the Flavor 
>> Leads as is the spirit of Ubuntu.
>>
> The page could be probably be a bit more specific on what is asked 
> indeed. I think it's a fair ask for the TB to review the current 
> wording and policy and see if we believe changes are needed. We do 
> review mailing list activity and open questions during our IRC 
> meetings so we should be able to pick it up next time
>
This is essentially what I was looking for, but since I get ignored so 
often on these matters, I felt it needed further attention. And, indeed, 
it does affect volunteerism. While I do have a technical mind, I'm 
trained in the ways of supporting volunteers and I bleed community, so I 
will do whatever it takes to protect volunteers, not simply including 
myself.

With that, I thank you for the consideration on this matter.

-- 
Project Leader - Ubuntu Studio
Technical Lead - Edubuntu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/attachments/20231124/8ac9f13b/attachment.html>