re-vision on the ARB - restaffing

[Bhavani Shankar R]

On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Allison Randal <allison at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On 08/24/2012 07:00 AM, Bhavani Shankar R wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Andrew Mitchell <ajmitch at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sure, I'm happy to wait (far too busy at the moment :) ). One thing that I
>>> noticed this week was that 4 of the 7 ARB members will expire from the team
>>> in about 3 weeks time. While it might be good to set up an election for new
>>> members now, I think it may be better for any new process to be agreed upon
>>> prior to restaffing, when we have a better odea of what will be required of
>>> people and how many people may be needed.
>
> And since Jonathan resigned, that means it'll be down to 2 members.

Yes which will be less than the minimum required quorum of 3 as you stated.

>
>> +1 here.  So that any new members can start off with the new process
>> when selected. (Instead of pushing it after restaffing and spending
>> some time on the transition later to a new process)
>
> Here are the current requirements:
>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard/Restaffing
>
> We arranged a different voting scheme with the Community Council after
> the last round, since the m-of-n candidates didn't fit very well.
> Instead we'll use a simple +/-/Abstain poll, and take all candidates
> that show reasonable support from the Ubuntu Developers. I'll update the
> text.
>

+1

>> Apart from the above how about having a "stricter criteria" of
>> selection (when restaffing does take place) like below
>>
>> An ARB member applying should be/have:
>>
>>  1. Strong technical background.
>
> +1
>
>>  2. Should be a MOTU/Core Dev (+ being a Debian developer would be
>> "nice to have")
>
> We may have a hard time recruiting if these are requirements. I'd lean
> toward keeping the current *requirement* of Ubuntu membership and Ubuntu
> developer status, with a note that we're looking for more experienced
> developers, so any work in MOTU/Core Dev/DMB/Backports/Debian is be a plus.
>

Fine with this too. Any ubuntu member with endorsement from one of the
developers in the ubuntu community will also be good I think

>>  3. Prior experience of reviewing apps (for instance, prior experience
>> of helping with the app-review-contributors would be desirable)
>
> Yes, I hope several of the current contributors will apply. One thing to
> keep in mind is that we're moving toward automatic publishing, but the
> code won't be in place to make it work until around 13.04 or 13.10, so
> in the mean-time the ARB will still need a good number of members who
> can do manual reviews.
>

+1 (Even I was thinking of the same)

On a side note, few manual overviews before Automatic publishing of
apps (when it does fall into place) would be perfect I think

>>  4. Endorsement by atleast 1 ubuntu developer on the wiki page while
>> applying (as an evidence of work within the ubuntu development
>> community.)
>
> +1, we required this last time, and it worked out well.
>
> Allison

Thanks!

-- 
Bhavani Shankar
Ubuntu Developer       |  www.ubuntu.com
https://launchpad.net/~bhavi