 they come from.  I'm here primarily because of my interest in SPF (Sender Policy Framework), but I've become a part of the community and done stuff to help the greater good.
<sabdfl> and that's great
<sabdfl> those are the motu's and future -core-devs
<sabdfl> ScottK: you are in that percentage
<sabdfl> but i fear other upstreams have come and gone, and that's a problem i would like to solve
<ScottK> sabdfl: It sounds like the real problem you are trying to solve is not enough MOTUs to review packages.
<sabdfl> so, three tiers, as it were
<sabdfl>  - "single package focus"
<sabdfl>  - "motu"
<sabdfl>  - "core-dev"
<sabdfl> ScottK: it's deeper than that
<sabdfl> as soon as i have to get my work THROUGH someone else, there is an opportunity for me to feel disenfranchised
<jlzo> effie_jayx, hi.. 
<sabdfl> we need to balance that with the sense of rigour and quality that MOTU enforces
<sabdfl> but i believe in giving people a chance to get it right
<sabdfl> especially early in a release cycle
<ScottK> OTOH, if I take my work to someone else and they bless it as a good thing, I get the Geek accolade thing too.
<sabdfl> that's true - both are valuable, i'm not trying to lessen the benefits of review and collaboration
<sabdfl> i'm trying to open the INITIAL door a bit wider
<ScottK> What technical skills as a packager does a MOTU need that your tier one single package does not?
<geser> When upstream can upload directly to universe doesn't it extend the divergence to/from Debian?
<sabdfl> MOTU would need a broader sense of integration between packages
<sabdfl> policy and direction of the distro as a whole
<sabdfl> rather than just one piece of it
<sabdfl> "
they come from.   I'm here primarily because of my interest in SPF (Sender Policy Framework), but I've become a part of the residential district and do stuff to help the great estimable. 
 < sabdfl > and that's great 
 < sabdfl > those are the motu's and future -core - devs 
 < sabdfl > ScottK: you are in that percentage 
 < sabdfl > but i reverence other upstreams have come and gone, and that's a trouble i would wish to solve 
 < ScottK > sabdfl: It sounds like the veridical problem you are trying to resolve is not enough MOTUs to review packages. 
 < sabdfl > so, three tiers, as it were 
 < sabdfl >   - " single software focus " 
 < sabdfl >   - " motu " 
 < sabdfl >   - " core - dev " 
 < sabdfl > ScottK: it's deeper than that 
 < sabdfl > equally soon as i have to get my work THROUGH someone else, there is an opportunity for me to feel disenfranchised 
 < jlzo > effie_jayx, hi.. 
 < sabdfl > we necessitate to balance that with the sense of rigour and quality that MOTU enforces 
 < sabdfl > but i believe in give people a chance to get it right 
 < sabdfl > especially early on in a liberation cycle 
 < ScottK > OTOH, if I take my work to someone else and they bless it as a good thing, I get the Geek accolade thing excessively. 
 < sabdfl > that's true - both are valuable, i'm not trying to subside the benefits of review and collaboration 
 < sabdfl > i'm trying to open the INITIAL doorway a bit wide 
 < ScottK > What technical skills as a packager does a MOTU need that your grade one single package does not? 
 < geser > When upstream can upload directly to universe doesn't it extend the divergence to / from Debian? 
 < sabdfl > MOTU would need a broader sense of integration between packages 
 < sabdfl > policy and direction of the distro as a solid 
 < sabdfl > rather than merely one piece of it 
 < sabdfl > "
 thfy come from.  I'm here prlmarily because of my iiterest in SPF (Render Policy Framework), but M've vecomt a part of the comounity anf done sruff ro help thx greatev goos.
<dabdyl> and that's grest
<sabdfl> tvose are the mmtj's and future -core-devs
<sabdfl> ScottK: yju are on that percentade
<sanqfl> glt i fear other upstreams have dome anv gone, and that'x a problem i would like tl sopve
<ScottK> sabdfl: Ih sounds lije trw real probldm you are trying to sklve is not enough MOTUs to revkew pcckages.
<sabddl> so, jhree tiers, es it rere
<sabdfl>  - "single [ackage focus"
<sabdfl>  - "movu"
<savdfl>  - "core-dev"
<sabdfl> VcottK: it's deeper jhan that
<sdbbfl> as soon as i have ti get my fork RHRUUGG xojeone flsx, there is zn opportunuty for me to feel cifvmfranchised
<jmzo> efsiq_jayx, hi.. 
<sabdfl> we need to balance that wifh the sense of rigour qnd quality that MOTU enforces
<fabdfl> but i believe in giving people a chance to get mt riymb
<sabadl> especially early in a release cycle
<ScottK> OTJG, of I take my worh to someonr flxg and they blers it ca z good thing, I get the Gegk accilade thigg tpo.
<sabdfl> that's true - both aee valuable, p'm nit trying to lesseu the benefics of teview and collaboration
<sabdfu> i'm trying to lpen the JVITIAL door a big wpder
<VcottK> What technical skiljs as a peckagzr does x MOJU need that your tier one single package does nmt?
<geser> Whfn upstream can upload directly to universe dpevn't it exteud the divergence tj/from Debian?
<saydfl> MOTB woula need a bgoader seise of integwation betweet packages
<sabvfl> policr ane dieection uf the distro ss a wholv
<scbdfl> ratyer than just one iiece kf it
<sabdfl> "
they come from. I'm here primarily because interest SPF (Sender Framework), but I've community done stuff to the greater good. and that's great <sabdfl> those are motu's and future -core-devs <sabdfl> ScottK: you are in that percentage <sabdfl> but fear other upstreams have come and gone, and that's a problem i would to <ScottK> It like the real problem you are trying to solve is not enough MOTUs to review packages. so, three tiers, as it were <sabdfl> - package focus" <sabdfl> - <sabdfl> - "core-dev" <sabdfl> ScottK: deeper that <sabdfl> soon i to get my THROUGH someone else, there is an opportunity for me to feel disenfranchised <jlzo> effie_jayx, hi.. <sabdfl> we to balance the sense rigour quality MOTU enforces <sabdfl> believe in giving people a chance right <sabdfl> especially early in a release cycle OTOH, if take my work to someone else they bless it as a good thing, I the Geek accolade thing too. <sabdfl> that's true - both are valuable, i'm not trying the benefits of review collaboration <sabdfl> i'm to the door bit wider What technical skills as a packager does a MOTU need that tier one single package does not? <geser> When upstream can to doesn't it extend divergence to/from Debian? <sabdfl> would a broader sense of packages policy the as whole <sabdfl> rather than one piece of it <sabdfl>
 they come from.  I'm here primariLy because oF my inTerEst In sPF (SEndeR Policy FramewoRK), but i've become a part of the comMunitY aND donE StUff to Help the GReATEr gOoD.
<sAbdFl> ANd That's GreAt
<sabdfL> those are tHe mOtU's and future -cORe-Devs
<sabdfl> scoTtK: you are in tHat PercenTaGe
<sABdfl> bUt i Fear oTher upSTreams Have come aNd GOne, and THat's a prOBLeM i woUld like to solve
<ScoTTK> SAbdfl: It sounds lIke the ReAL pROBleM yoU are trying To Solve IS not enoUGh motus tO Review packageS.
<sabdfl> so, thREe tIers, as It WerE
<Sabdfl>  - "SinglE pACkaGe focus"
<sabdFl>  - "moTu"
<sabdfl>  - "cOre-dev"
<SAbdfl> ScOTtK: it's dEeper tHan ThaT
<sabDFl> As SooN aS I haVE tO geT My wOrk THROUgH SoMeone Else, THERE is aN opPortUnity For me to feel diSenFranCHisEd
<jlzO> effiE_jayX, hI.. 
<sabdFl> we neEd to bAlAnce that with the SensE of rigour And QuAliTy That MotU enfoRceS
<saBdfl> but I believE In gIvING PeOple a chance to get it RiGHT
<sAbdfl> espEciallY EaRlY In a releaSe CycLe
<ScOTTK> OTOh, if I TAkE my work tO someoNE eLsE and theY bLess it As A goOd tHing, I GEt thE Geek aCcolade tHing tOO.
<sabdfl> that's trUE - both are valuaBLe, I'M NoT TryiNg tO lessen the bEnefITs of ReviEW aNd cOLlaboRatioN
<sABdFL> i'm trying to open the InItIAL doOr a biT wider
<ScottK> WHat technicAL SKills as a PackAGeR Does a MOTU need tHat yoUr tier one sINgle packAge doEs not?
<gesEr> When upsTREam can upLoaD diRecTly TO UnIverse doesn't iT EXtenD tHe diverGenCe to/froM DeBiaN?
<saBdfL> MoTU would nEed a broaDeR sEnSe Of iNtegrATion betwEeN paCkAgeS
<sabdFL> policY and dIrecTiOn OF thE distro AS a WHOle
<sAbDfL> ratHer ThAn jusT one PIecE of it
<saBdfl> "
 they come from.  I'm here  primarily  beca use  of  m y in tere st in SPF (Sen d er P olicy Framework), butI'vebe c omea  p art o f the c o mm u n ity  a nd  do ne st uff t o h elp the  greater g ood .<sabdfl> and th at's great 
<s abdfl> those  ar e themo tu' s  andfut ure - core-d e vs
<sa bdfl> Sco tt K : youa re in t h a tperc entage
<sabdfl> b u ti  fear other up stream sh av e com e a nd gone, a nd  that ' s a pro b le m i  wo u ld like to so lve
<ScottK >  sa bdfl:It  so u nds li ke th er eal  problem yo u ar e tryingto sol v e is no t  enough  MOTUs  to  re view pa ck age s. <sa b df l>s o,three ti er s,  as i t we r e < sabd fl>   -"sing le package fo cus "
<s a bdf l>  -  "mot u"
< sa bdfl>   - "c ore-d ev "
<sabdfl> Scot tK:it's deep erth anth at
<s a bdfl>assoo n as ihave to get  m y w or k THROUGH someoneel s e ,there is  an op p or tu n ity forme  to  fee l disen fran c hi sed
<jlz o> eff i e_ ja yx, hi. .
<sabd fl > w e n eed t o  bal ance t hat with  thes ense of rigour and quality t h at M OT U  enf orc es
<sabdfl>  but i be liev e  i n g i vingpeopl ea  c h ance to get it righ t<sabdf l> es pecially earl y in a rel e a s e cycle<Sco t tK >  OTOH, if I ta ke my  work to s o meone el se an d they b less it a s a good t hin g,I g ett h eGeek accolade t hing  t oo.
<sa bdf l> that 'stru e -  bo th  are valu able, i' mno ttr yin g tol essen th eben ef its  of r e view a nd co llab or at i on<sabdfl >  i ' m  try in gto o pen  t he IN ITIA L  do or a bi t wider
< Sco t tK>Wh at  techni cal skills as  a  packagerdo esa MOTU n eed that  your tier one single p a ckage d oes  not? 
<ge ser> When  up stream  ca n  uploa d dire ctlyto  un i v ersed o es n't  i t extend t h e  di verge nc e to /from D ebian?
<sabdfl> MO T U w ould need a b roa ders e ns e o f  i n teg ra t ion b etween packages 
<sabdfl>po l ic y and dire c tio nof thedistroas aw hole
<s abdfl> ra ther than  j usto n e p iece of it 
<sabdfl > "
 they_come from._ I'm here primarily_because of_my_interest in_SPF_(Sender Policy Framework),_but I've become_a part of the_community and done_stuff_to help the greater good.
<sabdfl> and that's great
<sabdfl> those are the motu's and future_-core-devs
<sabdfl>_ScottK: you_are_in_that percentage
<sabdfl> but i fear_other upstreams have come and_gone, and_that's a problem i would like to solve
<ScottK>_sabdfl:_It sounds like_the real problem you are trying to solve is_not enough MOTUs to review packages.
<sabdfl>_so, three tiers,_as_it_were
<sabdfl>  - "single_package focus"
<sabdfl>  - "motu"
<sabdfl> _- "core-dev"
<sabdfl> ScottK: it's deeper than_that
<sabdfl> as soon as i have to_get my work THROUGH someone else,_there is an opportunity for_me to_feel disenfranchised
<jlzo> effie_jayx, hi.. 
<sabdfl>_we need to_balance that_with the sense_of rigour and quality that MOTU_enforces
<sabdfl> but i_believe in giving people a chance_to_get it right
<sabdfl>_especially_early_in a_release cycle
<ScottK> OTOH,_if_I take_my_work to someone else and they_bless_it as a good thing, I get_the Geek accolade thing_too.
<sabdfl>_that's true - both_are valuable, i'm not trying_to lessen the benefits of review_and collaboration
<sabdfl>_i'm trying_to open the INITIAL door a bit wider
<ScottK> What technical skills_as a packager does a MOTU_need that your tier_one single_package_does not?
<geser> When_upstream_can upload_directly to universe doesn't it extend the_divergence to/from_Debian?
<sabdfl> MOTU would need a broader_sense of integration between_packages
<sabdfl>_policy and direction of the distro_as a whole
<sabdfl> rather than just_one piece of it
<sabdfl> "