Understanding the definitions and expectations of our membership processes

[Greg Grossmeier]

<quote name="Jorge O. Castro" date="2011-07-20" time="16:11:16 -0400">
> Hi everyone,

Hi Jorge!

> I am confused as to the definition of the different levels of Ubuntu
> Developers and how that relates to membership in each of the various
> teams (though probably involves overall project membership as well). 

As someone who only deals with membership from the "community" side (ie: 
not Developer Membership) I can agree with you.

> I
> thought I would bring this up for discussion as it seems to be getting
> more confusing and I'm having a hard time understanding what the level
> of expectations for someone applying for Ubuntu membership for a given
> role is, as well as to what the expected behavior is for endorsements
> from existing members.

Thanks.

> According to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers an "Ubuntu
> Prospective Developer" is someone "who probably just started
> contributing to Ubuntu". The description on the wiki page doesn't list
> anything critical there; the person still needs a sponsor to upload,
> etc. From what I can read it's basically the same as Ubuntu Membership
> but you're interested in eventually going down the development path
> and you have a mentor/sponsor.

I disagree with the "it's basically the same as Ubuntu Membership" part. 
Ubuntu Membership, on the America's Membership Review Board (of which I 
was up for re-election recently, will hear results soon hopefully) those 
requirements to be a "Prospective Developer" only partially meet the 
requirements for general "Ubuntu Membership."

The main part missing, of course, is the "sustained and significant" 
contributions, as you mention below.

> Ok, that sounds good to me. This feels
> like a position that should be relatively low barrier.

The Prospective Developer should definitely be low barrier, but I 
wouldn't conflate that with general Ubuntu Membership.

> Here is an example from the last DMB meeting minutes: "The current
> consensus is that although this contributions can be used to satisfy
> certain tests applied by the board to determine level of skill, it is
> not clear if it is appropriate to use it to satisfy the test of
> sustained and significant *development* contribution to Ubuntu
> (especially versus the less specific test of sustained and significant
> contribution to Ubuntu applied by the Regional Membership Boards). In
> previous applications to the DMB and Regional Membership Boards,
> significant contributions to upstream projects exclusively but not to
> Ubuntu specifically have not been deemed satisfactory."
> 
> Ok so that seems to make sense to me too.

Agreed.

> It is my understanding that
> "significant and sustained" has usually meant "about 6 months", except
> in cases where it doesn't. However some applicants for membership have
> had endorsement from existing members where they do feel that that
> person has had significant and sustained contributions and have had
> their applications for membership declined.

Right, it is hard to judge and unfortunately it is not an objective test, 
which is why we have people on the Membership Review Boards instead of 
scripts. If, for instance, a person contributed heavily for 2 weeks 7 
months ago, but then did not contribute at all until 1 week before they 
were up for membership, that probably wouldn't cut it for membership. 
(This is assuming the only contributed to Ubuntu for a total of 3 weeks.)

But, one thing that definitely helps me (I can only speak for myself) 
when I review candidates is the endorsements they receive from current 
members of the community.

> So my questions are:
> 
>  - How important are endorsements from existing members to the
> membership boards and how much are they taken into account when
> reviewing an applicant?

Tons. Lots.

>  - And if they're not important than why do we have them? Why not just
> have a list of things you need to get membership for each step?

In my non-development membership capacity: There is not an easy way of 
creating an objective, points based, pass/fail test for membership.

>  - When endorsing people do we have a hard rule about 6 months of contributions?

Endorsements can come from anyone at any time. If I run into someone 
doing great work right away, I should consider adding an endorsement to 
their wiki page even if it has only been 1 week since they started 
contributing.

> I am asking these because I am becoming unsure when I should be
> endorsing a candidate for membership. Thanks!

For general Ubuntu Membership Board meetings, please do! It helps me/us 
tons!

Thanks,

Greg

-- 
|       Greg Grossmeier |
| http://grossmeier.net |