Atmosphere in the MOTU team (Was: Re: StableReleaseUpdates: gnumed-client (0.2.6.3-1ubuntu0.1) available for testing)
Scott Kitterman
ubuntu at kitterman.com
Tue Oct 23 14:22:27 BST 2007
On Tuesday 23 October 2007 09:01, Gauvain Pocentek wrote:
> 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?
I didn't say I wanted that. I was just pointing out that the processes are
one way, so I think it's prudent to be careful going through the gate.
> 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
It's to late for that. The election has already started. If someone's
fitness to be on MC is at issue (and personally, I think it is), then in the
view of the MOTUs who are currently voting is the ONLY place to have that
discussion.
> > 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.
The same mail said he didn't even know how to test it yet. Personally, I
don't ascribe to the "Whack the heck, it's only Universe" theory of Universe
QA. Developers have a responsibility to do their best to make sure what they
upload works.
While some of the language has been harsh, I don't think it's some kind of
war. My first post on the topic asked for a clarification of policy. I was
suprised the "what the heck, upload it" view got any support at all, but it
did and so we are clarifying the policy. I'm glad I brought it up.
> > 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.
I don't recall being asked who I thought should be nominated to MC. AFAIK, no
MOTU outside MC was asked. These candidates are imposed from above.
> > 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.
I don't think you are understanding my point. This isn't about proposals
being rejected, it's about trusting the judgement of the people who are
making the decisions for Universe.
Scott K
More information about the Ubuntu-motu
mailing list