Membership Page v1

[David Farning]

On 2/22/07, John Vivirito <gnomefreak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Alex Latchford wrote:
> > David Farning wrote:
> >> Hey all, Another page for your consideration and feedback at
> >> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Membership It is based
> >> closely off of the Ubuntu membership page, but I eliminated the
> >> bit about testimonials. We are small enough that we should know
> >> everybody for a few more months.
> >
> >> Thanks David
> >
> >
> > Although I feel the Council is a good idea, I am gradually shifting
> > from the membership policy that it is enforcing. The reason I
> > joined Ubuntu without really any prior experience was because
> > people higher up trusted me to make the edits, change the statuses,
> > occasionally get it wrong.
> >
> > I still think we should have a membership policy but not quite as
> > strict as it currently stands, I think that not allowing new users
> > to edit Statuses is a bit silly as it just piles on more work for
> > us. (I mean compared to the time it would change to read the report
> > and change it back).
> >
> > I think also even discussing using a separate, 'private' IRC
> > channel and/or mailing list is a bit silly too.
> >
> > Please correct me if I am wrong, but it is worrying me a bit about
> > how hard it is to actually get into this team and to help out.
> >
> > Thanks, Alex.
> David the page looks pretty good. it looks like you brought a bit too
> much over from the ubuntu memebership page. We shouldnt be as strict
> as them. IMHO I think lightening up on membership policys is a pretty
> good idea. Once people join (we can pretty much answer any questions
> they have on bug triage (this is for bug triagers). If someone applies
> we can look at them see what we think of memebership but im thinking
> the more people we get now we can train to do the job they like.
> (train may not be best of words to use) but you get the point.
> Alex as for my comment on another ML was made incase our ML becomes
> too noisy. not right off the bat. im thinking when we end up with
> (example: 100 memebers all using the mailing list like the
> ubuntu-users or kubuntu-users list. I never saw anything about another
> IRC channel. (if i said it im sorry i dont remember stating that.
>
> The less restrictions on membership is really all i can say. like with
> signing the CoC i dont think thats really good for us as we are a
> small team atm. I do however think they need to know our team repects
> the CoC <link to CoC> now i didnt see anything about editing status'
> but im leaning towards if they are gonna do bug triage to read the bug
> tag status pages and agree to do it in that manner. But we shouldnt
> make our team as hard to join as ubuntu membership as we will not get
> more people imho. Do we really need users membership for our team to
> expire? Maybe rather if they are gone for <so long>(to be determined)
> they have to reapply? there is a reason i say that but it is something
> i was fighting (maybe still am) with a team leader of a team im on.
>
> I mean no disrepect by my comments above they are just suggestions.
> Thank you.
> - --
> Thanks,
> GnomeFreak



Freddy, John
No disrespect taken.  In fact, it is a pretty well known fact that I am a
cranky old man who needs to lighten up;)

I'll give it another go in a couple of days.

I don't think John was not trying to create a 'private' mailing rather
separate mailing list just to help filter the traffic.  You have got to
admit that you guys are creating some serious traffic.  I _am_ trying to
get  the LP team to help us handle that better:)

The inability to change a bugs status is not something I made up;  It is
based on ones membership on the QA team.


thanks
David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-mozillateam/attachments/20070222/ea9b6778/attachment-0001.htm