ari-tczew to be excluded from Ubuntu community

[Bilal Akhtar]

On 04/09/2011 04:54 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Saturday, April 09, 2011 02:45:16 AM Vishnoo wrote:
>> On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 17:25 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> On Friday, April 08, 2011 05:19:30 PM Loïc Minier wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 08, 2011, Steve Langasek wrote:
>>>>>> Do we have something similar to debian-private in Ubuntu?
>>>>>
>>>>> God forbid :p
>>>>  
>>>>  Eh; yet it would still be "less private" than the subset of people who
>>>>  made the decision, while not being entirely public.
>>>>  
>>>>  Such a permanent list would have potential for abuse though, and its
>>>>  mere existence would cause people to wonder how much is being
>>>>  discussed on it.
>>>
>>> I think it's overkill to create such a permanent resource for instances
>>> where private communication among Ubuntu members is needed.  I think
>>> that in this particular case, Ubuntu members should be able to get
>>> access to the relevant information in private, but I don't think such a
>>> general resource is required or a good idea.  I'd suggest the process be
>>> that interested members mail the cc list and someone on the cc will mail
>>> them a gpg encrypted tarball.
>>
>> Wouldn't that cause a lag time in communication? Also, it would take an
>> extra effort from the CC to tarball(or just grab an existing tarball)
>> and send individually to every person who asks. And the present CC would
>> have to keep the tarball for ever, someone 1yr later might want to look
>> into some issue.
>>
>> How about a secure ppa for Ubuntu Members, where such tarballs can be
>> grabbed? (We did have a secure Ubuntu-members-only ppa for the fonts, so
>> I'm just saying PPA here. But any form which reduces lag time would be
>> better.)
> 
> This is a rare enough event (so far I believe it's happened approximately once 
> in the history of the project) that I don't see benefit in trying to make it 
> effecient.  I not arguing for it to be trivially available either.  I think 
> that if Ubuntu Members are concerned about such a decision they should be able 
> to satisfy themselves that the decision was reasonable.  Requiring a 
> deliberate step to request the data and receive it is I think better than 
> having it trivially downloadable for people who are just curiosty seekers.
> 
> In my opinion this is about establishing appropriate checks and balances in 
> project governence and not about trying to rehash or second guess what the CC 
> has done.

I agree with Scott. Ubuntu is a meritocracy and not a democracy. Though
the members of the CC are selected by Ubuntu Members, this doesn't mean
that the CC is always forced to bow down to the community in matters
like these. The CC has the right to to its job secretly if it wishes so.

I myself were curious in the beginning about the decision as it rather
surprised me. But reading this ML thread made me understand that the
decision must have been made after a lot of thought, and that I was in
no position to question the rationale behind of such a decision.

Bilal Akhtar.

> 
> Scott K
> 


-- 
Bilal Akhtar - Ubuntu Developer <bilalakhtar at ubuntu.com>
IRC nick: cdbs

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20110409/cf7a8292/attachment.pgp>