Michael Bienia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Or to put it an other way: what makes a person a "MOTU"? > - is it the membership in the ~motu team (and it's a coincidence that > the team has upload rights) > - or is it the upload rights to universe/multiverse (which are granted > by being a member of ~motu) > > Perhaps I see a difference where no exists, but it depends on how one > defines "being a MOTU".
I think the difference is only important if you also consider the effects that arise because of that. One possible effect if we choose the 2nd alternative is that we would effectivly require for all uploads to become 'full' MOTUs. That means if we have an applicant from a specialised team (think kernel, server, desktop team), do we require them to be active in the MOTU community first? In general we didn't in the past. Thinking more about it, it seems that we more or less already accepted that there are Ubuntu Developers that are not strictly MOTUs. Most commongly they can be found in the more specialised teams that I mentioned above. Interesting implication that come up with the plans about the UbuntuArchiveReoganisation is if e.g. a prospective kubuntu developer becomes kubuntu member, he will be granted upload permission for packages in the kubuntu seed. Which is of course part of why we want UbuntuArchiveReoganisation in the first place. I expect that after UbuntuArchiveReoganisation the majority of prospective ubuntu developers will no longer apply for MOTU, but for these specialised teams. What impact will that have for unseeded packages? And most interstingly for MOTU: what can WE do about those 'abandoned' packages? -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
