 we never did that
<tsmithe> we have perfectly good processes for granting upload rights. let's adhere to them, and make it easier for them to go through those processes
<sabdfl> we want a place where that stuff can go from embryonic to successful and that place should be right here
<sistpoty> and we are never doing this
<Toadstool> sabdfl: we never said "you're not good enough" to anybody!
<sabdfl> yes you did
<sabdfl> you said "your packages are not good enough"
<lupine_85> ScottK: no, I fixed the issues as soon as I became aware of them :) In fact it was imbrandon who pointed out the issues to me. Again, communication... the rejection reasons for the last set of packages never actually reached me. and that probably wasn't ubuntu's fault
<LaserJock> no we didn't!!!
<sabdfl> please understand i am not personally criticising anyone here
<sabdfl> i think everyone has done a great job
<LaserJock> sabdfl: did you listen to me though? We *did* upload their packages
<sabdfl> but our process has a negative consequence that we need to fix
<LaserJock> how is that saying "your packages are not good enough"?
<ajmitch> sabdfl: sayiung that packages are not good enough is a *big* difference from saying that people aren't good enough - getting packages improved is a critical part of it
<tsmithe> well, i don't think that this is the correct way to fix it!
<sistpoty> sabdfl: sorry, but what would you say if a package is not ready to get uploaded to universe? 
<jdong> Toadstool: frankly lots of processes around here imply it... I'm busy, that's not as important as the thing I'm doing now, etc.
<sabdfl> sistpoty: i'm saying we need a place for those to cook
<Toadstool> sabdfl: ultimately, those who said that the packages were not suitable for universe are the archive admins
<sabdfl> not in universe, but still in motu
<ajmitch> we can't
we never did that 
 < tsmithe > we have perfectly good summons for concede upload rights. let's adhere to them, and cause it easier for them to go through those process 
 < sabdfl > we desire a place where that stuff can go from embryonic to successful and that place should be right here 
 < sistpoty > and we are never dress this 
 < Toadstool > sabdfl: we never said " you're not good enough " to anybody! 
 < sabdfl > yes you do 
 < sabdfl > you said " your packages are not good enough " 
 < lupine_85 > ScottK: no, I fixed the issues as soon as I become aware of them :) In fact it was imbrandon who pointed out the issues to me. Again, communication... the rejection rationality for the last set of packages never actually reached me. and that credibly wasn't ubuntu's fault 
 < LaserJock > no we don't! !! 
 < sabdfl > please understand i am not personally criticising anyone here 
 < sabdfl > i think everyone has perform a great job 
 < LaserJock > sabdfl: did you listen to me though? We * did * upload their packages 
 < sabdfl > but our process hold a negative consequence that we need to fix 
 < LaserJock > how is that saying " your packages are not good enough "? 
 < ajmitch > sabdfl: sayiung that packages are not good enough is a * large * difference from saying that multitude aren't beneficial enough - getting packages improved is a critical function of it 
 < tsmithe > well, i don't remember that this is the correct way to sterilize it! 
 < sistpoty > sabdfl: sorry, but what would you say if a package is not ready to get uploaded to universe? 
 < jdong > Toadstool: frankly draw of processes around here imply it... I'm busy, that's not equally important as the matter I'm doing now, etc. 
 < sabdfl > sistpoty: i'm saying we need a place for those to cook 
 < Toadstool > sabdfl: ultimately, those who say that the packages were not suitable for universe are the archive admins 
 < sabdfl > not in population, but still in motu 
 < ajmitch > we can't
 we never did that
<tsmithe> wt have perfectly yiod prmcessea for grxnting upload rights. let's adiere to tyem, and make it easier for them to go tyroujh those processxa
<sabdfl> we wahb a pnece where that xtuff can co from embryotiz co successful and that place should fe righy jere
<sistpoty> agd wt awe nsnev doing this
<Toadstool> sabdfl: we hever seid "you're not gpod enough" to anybody!
<sabdfp> yed you did
<sabdfl> yok said "your pachqges are not good enough"
<lupine_85> ScojtK: no, I fixed the issues as soov as N became awqrw ov them :) In fect it was imbrandon who pminted put the issues to me. Again, communication... vhe rejection reasonf for the lcst set of packages nwvwr acjuallf rexxhea mt. aid fhat pgobebly wasn't hbuntu's fauot
<LaserJock> no we dodg'n!!!
<xabdfl> pleass undewseand i am not personally criticising anjone here
<sabdfl> i think eveeyone has done a greaj job
<LaserTock> sabdfl: did you listen to me though? We *did* upnoad vhdir pwzjahes
<sabdfl> but our process has a negative consqsutncv that we need to fix
<LaserJovk> hpr is that saykng "yobd lackages are not glod enoogh"?
<ajmutch> sabdsl: ssyiung that packages are nor good enougk iw a *big* difference from sayiny that peopke aren't good enough - gztting packages ilproved ia a critical part of id
<tsmithe> well, i don't think that thiw is the cofrecj way tj fix it!
<sidtpotn> sabdfl: sorry, but ahat could you say iv a package is not ready to get uploaded to umieerve? 
<jdong> Toadxtool: frankly lots of procexses arjund fere imply it... I'm uusy, that's njt as importatj as the thinj I'm doind noq, etx.
<sabdfl> ristpoty: i'm sauing we nveb a place for those to cook
<Boadsjokl> sabdfl: ultimcueli, those who saic tfat tje pwwkages were tot ruigsble wor universc afe tne archive admins
<sabgfl> hot in universe, buy ftill in motu
<ajmytch> we can't
we never did that <tsmithe> we have processes granting upload let's adhere to for to go through processes <sabdfl> we a place where that stuff can from embryonic to successful and that place should be right here <sistpoty> and are never doing this <Toadstool> sabdfl: we never said "you're not good enough" anybody! yes did you said "your packages are not good enough" <lupine_85> ScottK: no, I fixed the issues as as I became aware of them :) In it was imbrandon who out the issues to me. communication... rejection reasons the set packages never actually me. and that probably wasn't ubuntu's fault <LaserJock> no we didn't!!! <sabdfl> please understand i am not criticising anyone i think has a job <LaserJock> sabdfl: listen to me though? We *did* <sabdfl> but our process has a negative consequence we need fix <LaserJock> how is that saying packages are not good enough"? <ajmitch> sabdfl: sayiung packages are not good enough is a *big* difference from saying that people aren't good getting packages improved is critical part of <tsmithe> i think this is correct way to fix it! <sistpoty> sabdfl: sorry, but what would say if a package is not ready to get uploaded <jdong> frankly lots of around here imply it... busy, not as important as I'm now, i'm we a place for those cook <Toadstool> sabdfl: ultimately, those said that the packages are the archive admins <sabdfl> not in universe, still in motu <ajmitch> we can't
 we never did that
<tsmithe> we haVe perfectlY good ProCesSeS for GranTing upload righTS. let'S adhere to them, and make it EasieR fOR theM To Go thrOugh thoSE pROCesSeS
<sAbdFl> WE wAnt a pLacE where tHat stuff caN go FrOm embryonic tO SuCcessful anD thAt place shoulD be Right hErE
<siSTpoty> And We are Never dOIng thiS
<ToadstooL> sABdfl: we NEver saiD "YOu'Re noT good enough" to anybODy!
<SAbdfl> yes you did
<Sabdfl> YoU SaID "YouR paCkages are nOt Good eNOugh"
<lupINe_85> sCOTtK: NO, I fixed the issUes as soon as i BecAme awaRe Of tHEm :) In faCt it wAs IMbrAndon who poiNted Out the issUes to mE. again, coMMunicatIon... the RejEctIon rEAsOnS foR tHE laST sEt oF PacKages nevEr AcTuallY reaCHED Me. anD thAt prObablY wasn't ubuntu's FauLt
<LaSErJOck> no We didN't!!!
<saBdFl> pleAse undErstaNd I am not personallY criTicising aNyoNe HerE
<sAbdfl> I Think eVerYonE has donE a great JOb
<LAsERjOcK> sabdfl: did you listeN tO ME tHough? We *dId* uploAD tHeIR packageS
<sAbdFl> buT OUr proCess HAs A negativE conseQUeNcE that we NeEd to fiX
<LAseRJoCk> how IS thaT sayinG "your pacKages ARe not good enougH"?
<Ajmitch> sabdfl: SAyIUNg THat pAckAges are not gOod eNOugh Is a *bIG* dIffERence From sAyINg THat people aren't good eNoUgh - getTing pAckages improvEd is a critiCAL Part of it
<TsmiTHe> WEll, i don't think tHat thIs is the corREct way to Fix it!
<Sistpoty> Sabdfl: sorRY, But what wOulD yoU saY if A PAcKage is not readY TO get UpLoaded tO unIverse? 
<jDonG> ToAdsTooL: fRankly lotS of proceSsEs ArOuNd hEre imPLy it... I'm buSy, ThaT's Not As impORtant aS the tHing i'm DoINg nOw, etc.
<saBDfL> SIstpOtY: i'M sayIng We Need a PlacE For Those to Cook
<ToadsTooL> SabdFl: UlTimatelY, those who said ThAt the packaGeS weRe not sUITable for Universe are the archive adMIns
<sabdFl> nOt in uNiveRse, but stiLl iN motu
<aJmiTCh> we caN't
 we never did that
<tsmith e> we have  perf ect lygo od p roce sses for grant i ng u pload rights. let's ad hereto them ,  a nd ma ke it e a si e r  fo rth emto go  thro ugh  thoseprocesses<sa bd fl> we wanta  p lace where  th at stuff can  go  fromem bry o nic t o s ucces sful a n d that  place sh ou l d be r i ght her e <s istp oty> and we are n e ve r  doing this
<T oadsto ol >  s a b dfl : w e never sa id  "you ' re notg oo d e nou g h" to anybody !
<sabdfl>y esyou di d<sa b dfl> y ou sa id "yo ur packages  are  not good  enoug h "
<lupi n e_85> S cottK:  no , I  fix e dth e i ss u esa ssoo n  as  I becam eaw are o f th e m : ) In  fa ct i t was  imbrandon wh o p oint e d o ut th e iss uesto  me.Again,  comm un ication... thereje ction rea son sfor  t he la s t setofpac kages n ever ac t ual ly r e ac hed me. and that p ro b a bl y wasn't  ubunt u 's  f a ult
<Las er Joc k> n o we di dn't ! !! 
<sabdfl > plea s eun derstan di am n ot  pe rso nally crit icisin g anyone  here <sabdfl> i thi n k everyone ha s  d o n ea  gre atjob
<LaserJ ock> sabd fl:d id  yo u  list en to  m e  t h ough? We *did* uplo ad  their  pack ages
<sabdfl>  but our p r o c ess hasa ne g at i ve consequence  that  we need t o  fix
<La serJo ck> howis that s a y ing "you r p ack age s a r e  n ot good enoug h " ?
<a jm itch> s abd fl: say iun g t hat  pa ck ages arenot good  e no ug hisa *bi g * differ en cefr omsayin g  thatpeopl e ar en 't goo d enoug h  - g etti ng  p acka ges  i mprov ed i s  acritica l part of  it <tsm it he > well,  i don't thin kthat thisis  th e corr e c t way to  fix it!
<sistpoty> sab d fl: sor ry,  butwhat  would yo u s ay ifa p a ckageis not  read ytog e t upl o a de d t ouniverse?< jdo ng> T oa dsto ol: fra nkly lots of proce s ses  around hereimp ly i t . ..  I' m  b u sy,  t h at' s not as importan t as the t hi n gI'm doingn ow,  e tc.
<sa bdfl> s istpo t y: i'msaying we  need a p la ce f o r  th ose to coo k
<Toads tool> sab d fl: u l ti matel y,thosewh o s aid t hat th e  pa ckage s were  n ot sui table  f or unive rse are the archive adm ins
<s abdfl > n ot in uni ver s e,but still  inmotu
<ajmi tch > w e can 't
 we_never did_that
<tsmithe> we have perfectly_good processes_for_granting upload_rights._let's adhere to_them, and make_it easier for them_to go through_those_processes
<sabdfl> we want a place where that stuff can go from embryonic to successful_and_that place_should_be_right here
<sistpoty> and we are_never doing this
<Toadstool> sabdfl: we_never said_"you're not good enough" to anybody!
<sabdfl> yes you_did
<sabdfl>_you said "your_packages are not good enough"
<lupine_85> ScottK: no, I fixed_the issues as soon as I_became aware of_them_:)_In fact it was_imbrandon who pointed out the issues_to me. Again, communication... the rejection_reasons for the last set of packages_never actually reached me. and that_probably wasn't ubuntu's fault
<LaserJock> no_we didn't!!!
<sabdfl>_please understand i am not_personally criticising anyone_here
<sabdfl> i_think everyone has_done a great job
<LaserJock> sabdfl: did_you listen to_me though? We *did* upload their_packages
<sabdfl>_but our process_has_a_negative consequence_that we need_to_fix
<LaserJock> how_is_that saying "your packages are not_good_enough"?
<ajmitch> sabdfl: sayiung that packages are not_good enough is a_*big*_difference from saying that_people aren't good enough -_getting packages improved is a critical_part of_it
<tsmithe> well,_i don't think that this is the correct way to fix_it!
<sistpoty> sabdfl: sorry, but what would_you say if a_package is_not_ready to get_uploaded_to universe?_
<jdong> Toadstool: frankly lots of processes around_here imply_it... I'm busy, that's not as_important as the thing_I'm_doing now, etc.
<sabdfl> sistpoty: i'm saying_we need a place for those_to cook
<Toadstool> sabdfl: ultimately, those_who_said_that the packages were not_suitable for universe are the archive_admins
<sabdfl> not in_universe, but still in motu
<ajmitch> we can't