DMB: Proposal for a different review process

Mackenzie Morgan macoafi at
Thu Aug 4 15:09:56 UTC 2011

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Marc Cluet <marc.cluet at> wrote:
> Amongst those projects are Orchestra and Ensemble, both are mainly driven by Canonical but are Ubuntu projects, as emerging projects they do need some time to catch the community interest, so far they've been driving by very sharp minds working for Canonical (amongst them Clint Byrum and Gustavo Niemeyer, my kudos go to them).

Dustin has made it clear that he thinks they are part of Ubuntu.  He
and Emmet were supposed to have a discussion post-meeting about where
Orchestra/Ensemble fit, and as mentioned up-thread, the CC is now
going to have to weigh in on which Canonical projects are separate
versus part of Ubuntu.  All we had to go on in Juan's meeting, though,
was this:

<persia>	I understand that.  Do you believe them to be part of the
same project, or do you see Orchestra as a project to deploy the
output of the Ubuntu project?
<negronjl>	persia:  separate projects with a very parallel development
and deployment cycle ( after all, Orchestra is mainly managed by the
server/platform team )

If he doesn't think it's part of Ubuntu... we were a bit hand-tied.

> When our manager Dustin believed that we had gathered enough experience in order to become Ubuntu members he recommended us to do so, since he believes strongly in the community and Ubuntu (as so do we, otherwise we wouldn't be working for Canonical), and he gave us his recommendation, not out of being our manager but out of believing that we could be very useful community members and that after working with us in a day to day basis for months he thought we were more than ready for taking this step. I can completely understand Dustin's frustration from this point of view and I'm sad that this is resounding negatively with you Mackenzie, I do apologise personally (for my contributing part of being rejected) for that.

> When I stepped in front of the DMB in the irc meeting I was rejected because they felt that I didn't interact enough with the Ubuntu community, even if I've been interacting directly with upstreams (mcollective, ruby, etc…) and there's no community involvement yet with Orchestra, although there's some already with Ensemble that I'm very happy about. As you can understand it's a very complicated situation to be in.
> Please don't get me wrong, I'm very grateful for the DMB and its altruistic task, and I'll be the first one to defend its judgements. I learned from the DMB meeting and try very hard to downplay the negative parts of it and learn constructively from the recommendations, I'll try again to apply for contributing developer in the future because I believe I can be useful to the community not only when I'm working for Canonical but also on my free time.
> Hope this extended explanation gives you a bit more insight from the other side :)

I don't have a problem with anyone applying or having their
coworker/managers encourage them.  Contributors should all be
encouraging each other. It's the refusal to accept "not yet" as an
outcome by some of the endorsers that is causing chunks of various
membership boards to burn out. Why not just appoint a board stacked
with the people who will vote the "right" way?

Mackenzie Morgan

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list