DMB: Proposal for a different review process
chase.douglas at canonical.com
Wed Aug 3 15:37:54 UTC 2011
On 08/02/2011 06:46 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 02, 2011 04:04:31 PM Chase Douglas wrote:
>> On 08/02/2011 12:43 PM, Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Bryce Harrington <bryce at canonical.com>
>>>> Sounds like a good idea to me. It makes it analogous to other processes
>>>> such as the sponsorship, MIR, SRU, etc. processes that applicants may
>>>> already be familiar with.
>>> And drastically different from the other team membership processes
>>> (Ubuntu Membership, Kubuntu Membership, etc.) that applicants may
>>> already be familiar with.
>> True, but progress sometimes means change. I think this system would
>> work better, and if proven right it could be a model for other boards to
>> adopt. If it's worse, then the DMB can easily switch back. I would also
>> be happy to be a guinea pig for any process changes.
> Speaking as someone who considers Kubuntu membership (as part of Kubuntu
> Council) and developer (as part of kubuntu-dev), I don't think this is a good
> idea. As difficult as finding a good time for a meeting can be, I think the
> interactive discussion is an important part of it. I would hate to change the
> process into just a review of static content. I believe this proposed change
> would be a step backwards. Membership boards already use email voting on a
> case by case basis to address problems with sync when needed. I think that's
I thought about this aspect some, but then I remembered what it was like
when I've gone before the DMB before. What I remember is getting a
question, me answering it within 30 seconds, and then waiting a few
minutes for another question. Loop this around for 15 minutes or more
per person. There was a lot of dead time that could have been chopped
out, and I don't think there was really a feeling of a dynamic conversation.
There's also an issue with applicants who aren't native english
speakers. It can be unsettling for anyone to go in front of a board, and
to do it in realtime as a non-native speaker of the language. It can
make things bad enough that it deters people from trying. AFAIK (and
I've been proven wrong many times recently :), the DMB is the only way
to get upload rights like Core Dev and MOTU and to handle package sets.
The issue with the email voting is two-fold:
1. It's not advertised anywhere. I didn't know it was possible until it
was mentioned yesterday. This is easy to fix.
2. As mentioned yesterday, there's the possibility that applications
fall through the cracks.
I personally would rather skip the meeting altogether and do it
completely static anyways, either through email or LP or something else.
Would the DMB find it acceptable if people opt for that option just
because applicants prefer it? Or is it only available if nothing else works?
More information about the ubuntu-devel