Atmosphere in the MOTU team (Was: Re: StableReleaseUpdates: gnumed-client (0.2.6.3-1ubuntu0.1) available for testing)

[Gauvain Pocentek]

Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 October 2007 08:19, Gauvain Pocentek wrote:
>> Please let's try to avoid that kind of behaviour, there are smarter ways
>> to deal with problems in Ubuntu.
> 
> What do you suggest?  Once someone is a MOTU (or elected to MOTU Council) 
> there isn't AFAIK any process to deal with removal.

So one mistake and you're already wanting to drop upload priviledges?

Anyway, I was more talking about the "I blame you on an ML". Maybe this
could have been discussed in irc queries, in a private mail to the MC
members

> Personally, I was stunned by the discovery that any MOTU would upload 
> something to proposed that not only had they not tested, they didn't even 
> know HOW to test.  I've done good work with geser in the past, but this case 
> just doesn't strike me as being an example of good judgement at work.

Didn't he sent a mail to ask for tests? But again, I'm not judging the
facts, but how the whole history turned into some kind of war.

> I think, particularly as we have no voice in who gets nominated, that us 
> regular MOTUs should be able to closely question the people that the CC/TB 
> have decided are to be the masters of the masters so to speak.

AFAICT you already do that and your judgment is taken into account.

  This is a one
> time decision and it needs to be right.  Personally, I'm more worried about 
> getting the best MOTU council possible to make good decisions for our future 
> than I am about a few ruffled feathers along the way.

If it's really something that MOTUs feel, it's right the time to discuss
it in a meeting or in an other ML thread to maybe set up new policies. I
don't think that the MC has ever rejected discussion of new proposals
from the developers community.

Gauvain