should people.ubuntu.com be people.canonical.com

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 01:01:54PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> 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
> > Council.
> > 
> > So in the end, both of these are CC matters.
> 
> For the record, this was discussed before the Technical Board some time
> ago:
> 
>   http://people.ubuntu.com/~fabbione/irclogs/archived/2006-10/ubuntu-meeting-2006-10-10.html
> 
> 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.

Thanks for digging this up; I had a vague recollection that this had come up
before, but did not recall there being a clear decision.

-- 
 - mdz