On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 04:53:14PM -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote: > Colin, you mentioned some opportunity to define exactly what the role > should involve... I'd be pleased to know more about what you hope to > achieve and thus what sort of time commitment we're talking about?
Hi, sorry for the slow response. We'd like to see that most significant technical discussions at the board level in Ubuntu have some Debian involvement as well, so that we can share advice, learn from each other's history, compare notes on contentious issues that are coming up in both distributions, etc. (This is as opposed to more local governance kinds of things; for example the TB is currently the approver of new developer applications, although we're about to devolve that. A Debian representative would probably not be hugely interested in this kind of thing, although there's no reason for those discussions to be closed.) Like the TC, we're a body of last resort and so don't get involved in every last operational detail, but quite a few interesting things have come up for our review lately: samples over the last couple of months include Mono's patent status, non-trivial updates to ClamAV in stable releases, standards for base-2 vs. base-10 prefixes in user-visible text, and best practices on statistics gathering for developers, all of which seem to be immediately or potentially interesting for Debian too. If it helps to get a handle on the time commitment involved, I reckon that at the moment we're getting perhaps one issue every two weeks or so that's not primarily internal to Ubuntu, and that might be of interest to a Debian representative. We can't really define the role without Debian involvement, so that's part of what the representative would need to do; but does that give you some idea of what we're talking about? Regards, -- Colin Watson [[email protected]] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
