Plan to reform the Ubuntu Backporters Team [was: Proposal: sunset the backports pockets]

Fri Jul 30 19:46:37 UTC 2021

 FTR, I don't feel as strongly as Robie seems to, but I agree that the
previous team should be emptied from Launchpad.

On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 6:11 PM Robie Basak <robie.basak at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Iain,
>
> Perhaps I see the situation differently from you. From my perspective,
> this is an extraordinary intervention "from above" by consensus from
> Ubuntu developers. The backporters team has been unable to act for an
> extended period of time, and when threatened with closure, nobody from
> the team has been able to volunteer to continue in any role, let alone a
> leadership role. Others _have_ volunteered; therefore the team is being
> replaced.
>
> Nothing stops previous team members from continuing, subject to any
> requirements from _new_ team leadership, but they haven't even
> volunteered to continue. From my perspective they have effectively
> resigned through their extended absence.
>
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 02:24:31PM +0100, Iain Lane wrote:
> > > Assuming the change is made, following my proposal detail, I intend to
> > > remove everyone from ~ubuntu-backports and add Dan as its sole admin,
> > > and then let Dan take it from there (I assume he will add Mattia as a
> > > team member, and maybe Iain).
> >
> > To be honest, I think you could - and I'd prefer it if you would - leave
> > this up to the team, especially if there are newly active members.
>
> From my perspective, this would be as if people who have neglected[1]
> matters for years, and effectively blocked progress, would be retaining
> their ability to block progress. This is why I'm against your
> suggestion.
>
> IMHO, previous team members who have not participated in this thread
> should therefore no longer have the status of being in the team. I agree
> with you to leave membership up to the team, but I might differ from you
> in that I want this to be up to the *new team*, not people who have
> their name attached but haven't done anything for the team in multiple
> years and are not stepping up to do so now. IMHO the old and inactive
> team members should, due to neglect[1], have no more say than the wider
> set of Ubuntu developers in this matter. I value their experience and
> opinions, but the final decision making should no longer be up to them
> due to their extended absence. IMHO, any previous backporters team
> member who doesn't want this to happen has had multiple opportunities to
> step up or speak up, and has not done so.
>
> You, Iain, are an exception because you have actually participated in
> the conversation. Thank you :)
>
> Further IMHO, I think having old inactive members there is harmful. For
> example, for years people have been blocked on backports under the
> illusion that the team exists and team members just need to appear to
> review and approve their stuff. In reality, the team ceased to exist
> years ago; it was just Launchpad that was behind. If the team membership
> in Launchpad had been empty accordingly, we'd probably have sought to
> address the situation much sooner.
>
> So, my proposal is to empty the team membership, _once_, as part of this
> revitalisation. IMHO, only those volunteering to do the whole task of
> resurrecting the backports process (so far that's just Dan) should
> really have a decision making power here, since they are the only ones
> actually taking responsibility. Then the new team members will manage
> the team membership list as they feel appropriate.
>
> > I'd like to talk with the new team about this, but I'm personally not
> > interested in participating in the current process. It's broken by
> > design IMO. I'd be interested in participating in creating a reformed
> > process and more than happy to explain to the team what I consider to be
> > wrong with the way things are now, but I'll probably not be leading any
> > reform efforts myself just for spoons reasons. On that basis I'd be OK
> > stepping down from being an administrator, and possibly leaving the team
> > altogether, depending on what the active members consider their
> > priorities to be.
>
> Thank you for staying involved! Under my proposal I would expect you to
> end up being re-added, but I think that would/should be entirely up to
> the new team to decide. Specifically this is because if you're unable to
> help drive the reform, then that's fine but I think that also means that
> you cannot also be a decision-maker as to whether you get re-added or
> not. That would be up to those who _are_ driving the reform, since part
> of their remit and responsibility is to drive the process for team
> membership.
>
> >                   Again I'd prefer to work that out with the team rather
> > than the new owners doing this 'from above'.
>
> IMHO, that ship has sailed. The "from above" approach has become
> necessary because the existing team and team leadership has not managed
> to make any progress on this themselves; nor did they engage when Thomas
> volunteered to join the team to help. You can't have it both ways here.
>
> I expect Dan to work with you, and Ubuntu developers at large, to figure
> out a process that works for everybody. But I don't think he should be
> tied by the need to seek approval from team alumni who have neglected
> their responsibilities for years[1]. I think that one way to make this
> clear is by explicitly removing old, inactive team members from the team
> in Launchpad. This makes it clear that decisions will be made by the
> *new* team. Opinions from old team members are valued but they should
> not have any decision making powers. Their inability in this area is
> exactly why this change is happening.
>
> If Dan thinks otherwise then my view is moot, of course, since he's part
> of the new team that determines membership for themselves. However I
> don't think he should be burdened by social obligations of keeping old
> and inactive team members around because they might be offended at being
> removed, and so I think now is the best time to start afresh. Once the
> team works out how they want to manage team membership, he can then add
> or re-add anyone as appropriate.
>
> Robie
>
>
> [1] I hope "neglect" doesn't come across too strong. Everyone has their
> own priorities, and when they're volunteering their time (whether
> themselves or through an employer), we're grateful for what time they
> can commit, not ungrateful for what they cannot find the time to do.
> However, from the perspective of the team as a whole, I think that
> "neglect" is the only fair way of describing what has happened, and it's
> important for us to acknowledge this in order to make progress.
> --
> ubuntu-backports mailing list
> ubuntu-backports at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 4096R/B9444540 http://goo.gl/I8TMB
more about me: http://mapreri.org
Launchpad User: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri
Ubuntu Wiki page: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MattiaRizzolo