[ubuntu-studio-users] Fwd: UbuntuStudio flavor status in jeopardy, action needed [Was, Re: [Ubuntu Studio] Cry For Help]
Erich Eickmeyer
eeickmeyer at ubuntu.com
Wed Mar 6 21:32:25 UTC 2019
Hi Charlie,
Not much can be done outside of the Ubuntu developers right now.
Currently, as I write this, I'm working with a MOTU and we're getting
stuff sponsored & uploaded. Once this happens, then it's a matter of
myself and Ross getting sponsored, and then it's a matter of getting
the DMB to approve upload rights. If all of that happens, then Ubuntu
Studio will live-on.
Erich
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 1:28 PM, Charlie <info at soulgrave.com> wrote:
> oh my god. Erick, what do you need from me to keep Ubuntu Studio
> alive?
>
>
> On Mar 6, 2019 09:10, Erich Eickmeyer <eeickmeyer at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please see the forwarded email below. I'm forwarding this to you so
>> that you can see the dire need we have at this time for a MOTU to
>> step-in, sponsor the packages that we need sponsoring, and then
>> sponsor myself and/or Ross to become Per-Package Uploaders (PPU).
>>
>> There is a meeting on Monday to decide this. I have to have my
>> application (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Eickmeyer/DeveloperApplication)
>> done by Friday, which means the packages awaiting sponsorship must
>> be sponsored and Ross and/or Myself must be sponsored as well by
>> said sponsor. If this does not happen, then there will not be a
>> 19.04 release, which could effectively kill Ubuntu Studio as an
>> official flavor of Ubuntu.
>>
>> So, please spread the word, and try to rally support to keep this
>> effort afloat.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> < div>Erich
>> ----
>> Erich Eickmeyer
>> Council Chair
>> Ubuntu Studio
>>
>> ubuntustudio.org
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Steve Langasek <steve.langasek at ubuntu.com>
>> Subject: UbuntuStudio flavor status in jeopardy, action needed [Was,
>> Re: [Ubuntu Studio] Cry For Help]
>> Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2019 14:23:18 -0800
>> To: developer-membership-board at lists.ubuntu.com
>> Cc: technical-board at lists.ubuntu.com, Erich Eickmeyer
>> <eeickmeyer at ubuntu.com>, Ross Gammon <rosco2 at ubuntu.com>
>>
>> Dear DMB,
>>
>> In October 2016, I wrote a mail to ask the DMB to revisit their
>> approach to
>> the question of Ubuntu upload rights for Ross Gammon, in light of
>> the fact
>> that this meant the difference between having or not having any
>> uploaders on
>> the team of an official flavor, UbuntuStudio.
>>
>> Because there has been some turnover on the DMB since then, and
>> because I'm
>> adding some new cc:s here (including the TB), I'll quote my original
>> email
>> for context:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 10:49:57AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>>> Hi Ross,
>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 07:11:06PM +0200, Ross Gammon wrote:
>>> > Hi Laney & Steve,
>>
>>> > Thanks for helping us out in the Ubuntu Studio Team. I know you
>>> guys
>>> > already have plenty on the go.
>>
>>> > As Set says, I did apply to be a Contributor. But, because I
>>> had only a
>>> > few uploads in Ubuntu (I am a DM in Debian), and all to different
>>> > sponsors, I didn't manage to get any endorsements. It didn't
>>> help that
>>> > I emailed all the sponsors just before the northern hemisphere
>>> holidays
>>> > either :-)
>>
>>> > Anyway, after a few more sponsored uploads you can expect a fresh
>>> > application to the DMB. I will probably ask for PPU rights to
>>> the
>>> > ubuntustudio-* packages first. And then I will begin working
>>> towards
>>> > rights to the Ubuntu Studio package set (which needs a little
>>> update by
>>> > the way).
>>
>>> I think it's important that we as a community not be overly
>>> process-bound
>>> here. It is of course still necessary to make sure the people
>>> asking for
>>> upload rights are trustworthy and know what they're doing, but
>>> we're talking
>>> here about a situation where an official Ubuntu flavor has an
>>> active
>>> community but no active members with upload rights. Fixing this
>>> should not
>>> require multiple round trips to the DMB for them to grant
>>> gradually more
>>> permissions over a span of months; the Ubuntu Studio package set
>>> exists to
>>> serve the needs of the Ubuntu Studio community, and it should be
>>> uncontroversial for the folks who are actually maintaining Ubuntu
>>> Studio to
>>> be given access to this package set.
>>
>>> I am cc:ing the DMB to make sure they're aware of this situation,
>>> and to ask
>>> them to proactively address this gap for the Ubuntu Studio team.
>>
>> While this resulted in some email discussion with members of the DMB
>> at the
>> time, there was apparently no formal follow-up by the DMB, and I am
>> dismayed
>> to learn that two years on the situation remains unchanged and there
>> are no
>> active members of the ubuntustudio team with upload rights to the
>> Ubuntu
>> archive, which only came to my attention because of Erich
>> Eickmeyer's email
>> this weekend to ubuntu-release:
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 02, 2019 at 11:54:38AM -0800, Erich Eickmeyer wrote:
>>> [Sent to: Ubuntu Studio Development, Ubuntu MOTUs, Ubuntu Release
>>> Team]
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>
>>> Over the course of the past few months, myself, Len Ovens, and
>>> Ross Gammon
>>> have been working hard on updating the Ubuntu Studio tools. In
>>> particluar,
>>> we have done a number of things to the tools:
>>
>>> * Updated Ubuntu Studio Controls (ubuntustudio-controls) with a
>>> number of
>>> bug fixes
>>> * Renamed Ubuntu Studio Meta Installer to Ubuntu Studio Installer
>>> (ubuntustudio-installer) and gave it a secondary purpose of
>>> installing
>>> Ubuntu Studio's stack on top of a flavor other than Ubuntu Studio
>>> (think of
>>> Ubuntu Studio as a ToolKit)
>>> * Updated Ubuntu Studio's default theme and icon theme (part of
>>> ubuntustudio-look and ubuntustudio-default-settings in addition to
>>> ubuntustudio-icon-theme)
>>> * Updated Ubuntu Studio's plymouth boot theme (part of
>>> ubuntustudio-look)
>>> * Added a GRUB theme (grub2-themes-ubuntustudio)
>>> * Fixed bugs and missing apps in our menu (ubuntustudio-menu)
>>> * Worked upstream with the developer of Carla to get Carla in
>>> Ubuntu's
>>> repos.
>>
>>> Unfortunately, none of that made it in before feature freeze,
>>> despite my
>>> mailing our development list that it needed to happen, and tagging
>>> certain
>>> packages with [needs packaging]. Perhaps I'm just doing it wrong.
>>
>>> Basically, it comes down to this: Nobody on the Ubuntu Studio Team
>>> has
>>> upload privileges in any way. As such, these tools are sitting
>>> waiting to be
>>> uploaded.
>>
>>> So now, unless I'm wrong, each one of the packages now needs a
>>> Feature
>>> Freeze Exception to be uploaded into the repo. This is
>>> disappointing
>>> because, as of right now, Ubuntu Studio 19.04 is looking identical
>>> to Ubuntu
>>> Studio 18.10.
>>
>>> My intention was to apply to become a MOTU after the release of
>>> 19.04 in
>>> order to prevent situations like this from happening again.
>>> Unfortunately,
>>> it looks like that will be too late unless we can get someone to
>>> get in and
>>> review these packages:
>>
>>> * https://launchpad.net/grub2-themes-ubuntustudio
>>> * https://launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-controls
>>> * https://launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-installer
>>> * https://launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-icon-theme
>>> * https://launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-look
>>> * https://launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-menu
>>> * https://launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-default-settings
>>> * https://launchpad.net/carla
>>
>>> So, please take this as our cry for help to get these packages
>>> updated and
>>> included. I don't know how to do this, and I've never been shown
>>> the
>>> process. So, maybe my MOTU training sarts here.
>>
>>> Thank you for your time, and in advance for your help.
>>
>> With my TB hat on, let me be direct: it is unacceptable for us to
>> have an
>> official Ubuntu flavor which has no uploaders. This is explicitly
>> called
>> out in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RecognizedFlavors:
>>
>> Guidelines to become and remain a recognized flavor:
>>
>> [...]
>> * One or more developer with upload rights.
>>
>> Unfortunately, since it appears the DMB neither acted, nor
>> communicated with
>> the TB regarding their inaction, and since I also failed to follow
>> up to
>> make sure this was dealt with, we have now had *four* UbuntuStudio
>> releases (17.04, 17.10, 18.04, 18.10) which did not meet this policy.
>>
>> I will say right now that we will not have a fifth.
>>
>> Now as then, I do not presume to substitute my own judgement for the
>> DMB's
>> regarding whether any particular person should be given upload
>> rights; but
>> we do have a situation that needs to be dealt with rather urgently.
>> *Either* the UbuntuStudio community proposes, and the DMB ratifies,
>> ubuntustudio PPU rights for one or more of their devs; *or*,
>> UbuntuStudio
>> must not ship as a recognized flavor for Ubuntu 19.04.
>>
>> Here is what I would ask of each of the parties on this thread:
>>
>> - Erich, Ross: please resubmit ASAP for one or both of you an
>> application
>> to the DMB for PPU rights on the ubuntustudio packageset. (Given
>> Ross's
>> status as a Debian Developer, I would assume it would be easier
>> to get
>> him approved, but ultimately I think that's for you to decide.)
>>
>> - DMB: please prioritize working with the members of the
>> UbuntuStudio team
>> to ensure timely feedback and timely decision-making so that
>> these PPU
>> applications have optimal chances of success in time for 19.04.
>>
>> - fellow TB members: let's please discuss how we can sustainably
>> audit that
>> flavors are continuing to meet the requirements for recognition.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a
>> Free OS
>> Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the
>> world.
>> Ubuntu Developer
>> https://www.debian.org/
>> slangasek at ubuntu.com
>> vorlon at debian.org
>
More information about the ubuntu-studio-users
mailing list