On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 12:40 PM Rafael David Tinoco <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 09:18:51AM -0500, Dan Streetman wrote: > > > > The SRU process is most certainly not 'narrow' ;-) It covers the vast > > > > majority of what coredevs need to know, at least IMHO. > > > > > > I disagree. > > > > It's ok for us to disagree. > > > > Since there have been significant issues in the past both with finding > > applicants to join the DMB, as well as reaching quorum during the > > fortnightly meetings, perhaps it would be prudent to open the > > eligibility pool to include ~ubuntu-sru-developers, but ask them to > > abstain from voting (or at least refrain from casting the deciding > > vote) when evaluating a candidate for ~ubuntu-core-dev. > > Quick orthogonal question: What if... joining CoreDev obligates one to > be a DMB member (or, at least, applicant) in that same year ? Or 1 year > later, after one is a bit more experienced ? > > Based on latest membership: > > Dave Chiluk 2017-03-03 > Jeremy Bicha 2017-06-07 > Christian Ehrhardt 2017-08-28 > Balint Reczey 2017-11-15 > Eric Desrochers 2018-03-26 > Simon Quigley 2018-08-13 > Andreas Hasenack 2018-09-24 > Dan Streetman 2019-06-17 > Rafael David Tinoco 2020-01-13 > > That would help in finding applicants to join DMB, it seems. I know nobody > likes these types of mandatory services... but sounds fair, no ?
It seems fair to me, certainly; the only comment I would have is, if this is implemented, the number of board members probably should grow some, to account for the (maybe?) higher possibility of absenteeism, due to mandatory service. -- technical-board mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
