should people.ubuntu.com be people.canonical.com
cjwatson at ubuntu.com
Fri Sep 21 13:01:54 BST 2007
On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 04:55:21PM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 12:05:01AM -0700, Jordan Mantha wrote:
> > So one of my pet peeves in the community since I first started has
> > been that people.ubuntu.com accounts are only for Canonical employees
> > (as far as I'm aware). Since a large majority of Ubuntu developers are
> > volunteers and not Canonical employees it seems quite odd and
> > exclusionary to have a URL like people.ubuntu.com only for the
> > employees.
> Thanks for bringing this up; it's an old wart which deserves to be
> addressed. The issues to resolve are:
> 1. Clarifying the presentation of the existing resource, which is a
> Canonical one. This is for Canonical to deal with, but I think it can be
> handled through the Community Council.
> 2. How/when/whether we can provide a similar service to a broader subset of
> Ubuntu contributors, and which subset that should be. This seems like a
> joint Canonical / Community Council issue which should be brought before the
> So in the end, both of these are CC matters.
For the record, this was discussed before the Technical Board some time
There was a brief discussion on the council and board lists, as resolved
at the end of that meeting. To summarise, spiv said it would probably be
a couple of days of effort to implement the necessary code for SFTP
authenticated against LP (as a variant of bazaar.launchpad.net). As far
as I can see, the discussion stalled there with no further comments.
I think at this point there is little benefit in further CC discussion,
at least as far as your second point is concerned. Rather, it seems to
me that the suggested implementation should happen in order that it is
meaningful to discuss its deployment. Andrew, what do you need to get
time for this?
Colin Watson [cjwatson at ubuntu.com]
More information about the ubuntu-devel