But you can (and should!) be part of the Ubuntu community without having to
go though the approval (or verification or sponsorship or whatever) process.
Darcy.
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:25 AM, Zied ALAYA wrote:
> 'Canonical Supported': it sounds like the loco is now a Canonical
> employee!
> I
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Martin Owens wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 08:27 +0530, Bhavani Shankar R wrote:
>> something like those locoteams which are active and get approved by
>> the LoCo council will end up in the sponsored list and yet to be
>> approved teams fall in a not so active c
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Zied ALAYA wrote:
> 'Canonical Supported': it sounds like the loco is now a Canonical employee!
> I know that this program is sponsored by Canonical(until now), but a team is
> approved by the community of Ubuntu and we consider our selves members of
> the communit
2013/2/7 Martin Owens
>
>
> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 17:22 +1000, Jared Norris wrote:
> > On 7 February 2013 05:23, Laura Czajkowski
> wrote:
> >
> > > A topic that comes up frequently on blog posts we've seen and also
> from
> > > talking to people is the word "Approved"LoCo it doesn't empower pe
On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 19:43 +0530, Bhavani Shankar R wrote:
> But wont it be too harsh on other loco teams as it gives rise to a
> thinking that they are marked as inactive just because they might have
> forgotten/dint have time to update their wiki or portal page for some
> time whilst organizing
On 08/02/13 18:06, Martin Owens wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 19:43 +0530, Bhavani Shankar R wrote:
>> But wont it be too harsh on other loco teams as it gives rise to a
>> thinking that they are marked as inactive just because they might have
>> forgotten/dint have time to update their wiki or po
On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 18:49 +, Laura Czajkowski wrote:
> some teams prefer to use their own tools.
A fair point. But I'm thinking more about automation and instant
feedback. Not council meditation. I'm sure the council would make a lot
more detailed and accurate reporting, but that's not to sa
When our LoCo lost its "Approved" status, many members thought they were
no longer welcome in the Community.
Really, the only benefit we see to being an "Approved" LoCo is that we
receive branded Ubuntu disks for each release. And that seems more like
Sponsorship than Approval.
So, I would like t
* Martin Owens (docto...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 18:49 +, Laura Czajkowski wrote:
> > some teams prefer to use their own tools.
>
> A fair point. But I'm thinking more about automation and instant
> feedback. Not council meditation. I'm sure the council would make a lot
> mor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/08/2013 02:25 PM, Craig Maloney wrote:
> * Martin Owens (docto...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 18:49 +, Laura Czajkowski wrote:
>>> some teams prefer to use their own tools.
>>
>> A fair point. But I'm thinking more about autom
* Chris Johnston (chrisjohns...@ubuntu.com) wrote:
> Craig,
>
> At one point there was work being done on a team reporting system [1].
> Please feel free to pick it up and start developing on it. I suspect
> though that you may not want it completely integrated in LTP as I
> think other groups/tea
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Craig Maloney wrote:
> * Martin Owens (docto...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 18:49 +, Laura Czajkowski wrote:
>> > some teams prefer to use their own tools.
>>
>> A fair point. But I'm thinking more about automation and instant
>> feedback. Not co
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Darcy Casselman wrote:
> My vote would be for calling it like it is: Sponsored.
>
> Anything that appears to confer special status or recognition ends up with
> similar problems to "approved."
>
> It makes the pitch a lot easier too: "Go through our process and we
On 02/08/2013 04:26 PM, Elizabeth Krumbach wrote:
I would really like to see this too, the current bug to add this
functionality is here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/loco-team-portal/+bug/605651
I'm familiar with this ticket. I'm not sure how it relates with a
currently established process of
Hi folks,
I think that "sponsored" is great :-)
2013/2/8 Elizabeth Krumbach
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Darcy Casselman
> wrote:
> > My vote would be for calling it like it is: Sponsored.
> >
> > Anything that appears to confer special status or recognition ends up
> with
> > similar p
My two cents on this:
- I think "official" sounds good.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Tomo
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Tiago Hillebrandt
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I think that "sponsored" is great :-)
>
>
> 2013/2/8 Elizabeth Krumbach
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Darcy Casselman
>> w
+1 for "Sponsored" which seems to have a majority from my unscientific
view reading along.
I also like the term "Teams."
If a discussion of terms has come about, I feel a more substantial and
little discussed issue is the shortened version of Local Community,
LoCo, crazy in Spanish. This term is
On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 16:20 -0800, Grant Bowman wrote:
> I am with "Ubuntu California"
This is where you have to decide if your an actor on behalf of the
Ubuntu California Local Community, or an individual associated with
other individuals in the Local Community.
In my travels, I hardly ever say
On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 13:26 -0800, Elizabeth Krumbach wrote:
> I would really like to see this too
Feel free to snipper me on specific items. You've got a backlog of
reputation to spend the size of a moon.
Martin,
--
loco-contacts mailing list
loco-contacts@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubunt
19 matches
Mail list logo
