This page is intended to list all of the miscellaneous pieces of DMB knowledge that have accumulated over the years.

This page is authoritative. If you think you've found a mistake, please email the DMB.

Communication

Most non-realtime conversation happens on the devel-permissions public list. Realtime meetings happen on IRC on Libera in #ubuntu-meeting according to our regular meeting schedule.

Since part of the nature of our work is to deal with assessing personal conduct and abilities, depending on the topic it sometimes isn't appropriate for us to deliberate in public, or for others to contact us in public. For these matters, we use the private developer-membership-board list and the private IRC channel (#ubuntu-dmb on Libera) as appropriate. Use of the private IRC channel is discouraged except around the time of our public meetings, or when a private chat is specifically arranged, to avoid DMB members not online from missing out.

Conducting meetings

Scheduling

Meetings currently run every other week, alternating between 1600 UTC and 1900 UTC. In the case of vacation such as over New Year, cancel or move individual meetings as appropriate, but please try not to push all future meetings around, as this can cause some confusion.

The meeting schedule can be changed by the DMB by majority vote, and it is expected for the schedule to be confirmed or changed as necessary at the first meeting after new DMB members are elected. Please also consider the needs of pending and future applicants if changing the schedule, as doing so may affect their plans.

Agenda

We maintain an agenda page with the dates of upcoming meetings, the agendas for them and outstanding meeting actions.

Chair

We share the responsibility of chairing the meetings. There should be a list on the agenda page. If you have just chaired, rotate the list and update the entry at the top of the page so we know who is chairing next.

Quorum

Quorum was originally publicly discussed on the community forum. The specific meaning of quorum for voting was later clarified and is explained in the section below.

General progress during meetings

In January 2023 the DMB agreed to the following. See the original thread (November 2022 and January 2023) for more details.

1. We accept that it's OK for DMB members to be absent or distracted for whatever reason, but not to hold up meetings because of this. Corollary: if as a DMB member you are so distracted that you're holding up the meeting, then maybe you should consider yourself to be actually absent, and conscious to not hold the others up waiting on you.

2. We think that three minutes is about the maximum that should normally be acceptable for a response from a DMB member, with the majority of responses expected to be much quicker than that.

3. If a DMB member holds up meeting progress for more than three minutes because we're waiting for a response from them, then the chair should consider that person to be absent and move on. This includes voting: if that means the vote wasn't quorate, then we will end the vote and continue as if that person was absent anyway.
4. DMB members should prepare questions and comments in advance as much as possible to avoid holding up meetings while they research, think and type.
5. However, we don't want to prevent people from taking their time to research, think or or type long answers when this is actually required - for example in response to something that happened during the meeting itself. So a DMB member can indicate that they are genuinely active in the meeting but not ready to speak yet by sending "...", or a longer explanation if they wish, at least once every three minutes. This can include thinking time, doing research on an application, working on a long answer, etc. We will take "..." to mean "I'm still here, working on my next message to the channel, extending my timeout by another three minutes". The meeting will normally then wait for their message before moving on, subject to the chair's discretion.
6. For the avoidance of doubt, the above applies to DMB members only, not to anyone else, and certainly not to applicants. We've not seen an issue with applicants being unreasonably slow to respond, and want them to give us thoughtful responses and not feel under any additional pressure. They should respond as feel appropriate and as they always have done.

Handling applications

• Try to handle applicants in the order they applied, earliest first.

• Applicants will usually attend an IRC meeting to be questioned by the DMB on matters that members wish to clarify before they can vote. If the applicants or the DMB are having trouble meeting each other then the application may be handled over email, but it is important this happens in a timely fashion.

• Many of our applicants do not have English as their first language.
  • Be understanding if the answers you get are not 100% clear
  • Ask questions one at a time. Let the meeting know when you are done questioning so that others can take over.

• Make sure that the applicant has signed the Ubuntu Code of Conduct. It is required to be signed by every Ubuntu developer.

Voting

Applications have to reach +1 in order to pass. If the meeting is quorate and all members present vote in the same way (+1 or -1), then the application will have passed or failed - the remaining members cannot overturn the vote. If the vote is in doubt then it is hung and the remaining members will be asked to vote by email or at the next meeting. In this case those members are entitled to ask the applicant further questions if they still have any on reviewing the meeting log.

Actions after a successful application

1. Assign two meeting actions: one to make ACL changes, and one to announce the successful applicant. This is to make sure that the announcement does not get forgotten.
2. Adjust ACLs.
   • Modification of the membership list for an existing packageset team can be done directly by the DMB. A DMB member should go to the packageset's uploader team page, and add the applicant to the team.

   • Modification of the package list for an existing packageset can also be done directly by the DMB. This requires using the "edit-acl" tool

     • example (replace add with delete to remove a package instead of adding):

       •  edit-acl -S $RELEASE -P $PACKAGESET -s $PACKAGE add 

     • usually the command should be repeated for all supported releases:

       •  for RELEASE in $(distro-info --supported); do edit-acl ...; done 

   • If the action requires creation of a new packageset or PPU, or (rarely) changes to the uploader for a packageset or PPU, it must be done by the TB, so the DMB member must:

     1. For a new packageset, create a new uploader team (see Packageset section below)

        • For a new PPU, the uploader is the applicant

     2. Open a bug against the ubuntu-community project, and the bug description should include the exact "edit-acl" command to run.

        • For PPU creation, file a bug with this subject and include the PPU member name

        • For packageset creation (or uploader team change), file a bug with this subject and include the packageset name

        • In the bug, if creating a new packageset, request the TB create the packageset, setting the DMB as owner:

          •  edit-acl -S $RELEASE -p developer-membership-board -P $PACKAGESET -t admin create 

        • Also request the TB set or change the uploader:

          •  edit-acl -S $RELEASE -p $UPLOADER -P $PACKAGESET -t upload modify 

        • usually the commands should be repeated for all supported releases:

          •  for RELEASE in $(distro-info --supported); do edit-acl ...; done 

     3. Email technical-board@lists.ubuntu.com to inform them of the opened bug (include a link to the bug).

     4. Add the new TB bug to the DMB Agenda in the Open TB bugs section

     5. After the new packageset is created by the TB, a DMB member will need to add the appropriate packages

3. If not already a member, add the applicant to either ~ubuntu-dev or ~ubuntu-uploaders. See #Teams_to_add_uploaders_to.

   • If applying for Ubuntu Contributing Developers membership, the applicant should only be added to the ~ubuntu-developer-members team and nothing more.

4. Announce successful applicants (this can be done in a single email or multiple emails as appropriate), as the community council would like to see these announced and we agreed in a subsequent meeting. Send emails to:

   1. A reply to the original devel-permissions@lists.ubuntu.com thread (useful for future reference).

   2. An email to ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

   3. An email to ubuntu-news-team@lists.ubuntu.com

5. Remove the applicant's agenda item if it is still present.

Actions after an unsuccessful application

1. Assign a meeting action to close the application. Closing an application involves:

2. Reply with regrets to the devel-permissions@lists.ubuntu.com thread only (useful for future reference when the applicant reapplies, and to make it clear that voting is complete).

3. Remove the applicant's agenda item if it is still present.

Packagesets

Packagesets exist per-release and are defined in the Launchpad database accessible by API (using the edit-acl command). For easy viewing, see https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/packagesets/

Consider creating a packageset once we have:

• Two or more PPU uploaders
• Two or more related packages
• The grouping of those packages needs to make logical sense

The application process is more or less the same as for developer upload rights. The differences are:

• Each packageset needs a description. This is so that developers can mail devel-permissions after the set is created in order to have packages added. One DMB member then needs to judge the description against the reqested change and may make it if they decide it is warranted.

• We create packagesets with just one uploader, which is a team that we then add developers to. The team should be configured like so
  • Owned by the DMB (but without having the DMB as a member)
  • Self renewal
  • 720 day expiry period

    • Note, for 'Ubuntu Flavor' packageset teams, the TB requested a 180 day expiry period

  • ~ubuntu-core-dev as a member

  • Member of ~ubuntu-uploaders (in rare cases the DMB may require membership of packageset uploaders: in this case make the team a member of ~ubuntu-dev instead.)

If necessary, we can modify the description later on following a full vote, either by email or in a meeting.

Quick set of steps for creating packageset team:

1. Start at new team registration page

2. Make sure Membership Policy is Restricted Team

3. Set both the Subscription Period and Self Renewal Period to 720 (or 180 for 'flavor' teams)

4. Change renewal option to invite them to renew their own membership

5. Create the team
6. On the new team page:

   1. Click Change Details and then Change Owner

   2. Change the team owner to developer-membership-board

7. On the new team member page:

   1. Add ubuntu-core-dev

   2. Edit ubuntu-core-dev membership expiration to Subscription Expires: Never

   3. Remove (deactivate) yourself

   4. Remove (deactivate) developer-membership-board

8. Go to ~ubuntu-uploaders member page (or, if appropriate, ~ubuntu-dev member page) and add the new team as a member

Special packagesets

Automatically managed packagesets

Flavour packagesets are automatically managed from seeds. There is a script to control this, which contains a list of overrides too. See lp:~developer-membership-board/+git/packageset. We should look at automating runs of this script, but currently we need to remember to manually run it from time to time.

The script encodes the logic about which packagesets packages should go to, based on how sources are shared between flavours. Broadly, kubuntu/ubuntu/ubuntu-server are considered top-tier flavours and if they contain a package that is shared with others then they win and it goes into their set. core and desktop-core win out over all flavour sets too. See the seed-sets mapping at the top of the packageset-push script in the above branch.

Personal packagesets and glob expansions

Where an individual has a special reason for upload rights to a large number of packages that the DMB expects to need to manage frequently, we can create a "personal packageset" for this person, named "personal-<lpid>". There was once one: personal-gunnarhj, that existed until Gunnar was granted core dev and was therefore no longer needed. This was defined as the set that the DMB has agreed that Gunnar may upload, which included individual packages to which he has PPU, as well as glob expansions. The globs were defined in the packageset description. This way, any DMB member could update the glob expansions for Gunnar (by relying on their existing definition) without needing to refer to the full DMB for agreement or the TB to make the change.

This was managed manually, but it may be advisable to script updates if needed in the future.

See the thread starting at https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2016-May/000924.html, but extending over June, July, August and September for details.

Canonical OEM metapackage packageset

The canonical-oem-metapackages packageset is glob based. The exact glob is defined in the packageset description and is expanded according to the list of source packages in the Ubuntu archive for a given series. Any DMB member may update the packageset according to the glob expansion at any time without needing further consultation. However, this is now done automatically with this script. The script is "owned" by the DMB, who is the gatekeeper for changes to the script, but run and managed on behalf of the DMB by the archive admin team. To make this work, the packageset is owned by the archive admin team.

The expected nature of the packageset, to which the DMB grants upload access, relies on the MIR team's requirements for these packages, defined at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MIRTeam/Exceptions/OEM.

• Background thread: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2020-July/001542.html

• Decided at the DMB meeting of 2020-08-11

• Documented at OEMArchive

Delegating packageset uploader permissions

The DMB can decide to delegate the granting of upload rights to a packageset to a different group of developers. An example is that the Ubuntu desktop team is self managed. This means that applicants to that packageset do not come to the DMB, but they come to the team itself instead. The procedure is the same as for most other applications: somebody approaches the DMB with the proposal and it is voted on at the meeting. If approved, the body delegated should be added as an administrator of the team. It is very important that the teams come with a policy that says how applications will be managed. That is the document which you approve. You can see some examples on DeveloperMembershipBoard, and it is important that this list is kept current.

SRU Developers

Based on this thread, the DMB agreed to create a new team for SRU developers. This was announced to ubuntu-devel on 28 February 2017. See UbuntuDevelopers#SRU_developers for details.

This team is for contributors who work mostly on SRUs but don't necessarily yet have experience in wider Ubuntu development. Team membership allows the sponsors to get out of the way for SRUs only.

This team grants Ubuntu membership. In other words, the DMB must determine that an applicant meets the requirements for Ubuntu membership before granting an applicant membership of this team.

Add successful applicants to the https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-sru-developers team.

Removals

There was some concern about potential bad uploads bothering the SRU team, so to mitigate this the DMB also agreed that individual ~ubuntu-sru-developers membership will be removed if any of:

1. ~ubuntu-sru resolves to remove the member (how they do so is up to them); or
2. the DMB resolves to remove the member by a quorate vote, and a vote will be held if any member of ~ubuntu-sru requests it.

Teams to add uploaders to

By default, uploaders to packagesets and per-package uploaders should be granted membership. This does not happen automatically - they must be added to the ~ubuntu-dev team. The reason for this is that occasionally the DMB may want to grant people upload rights if they do not meet the usual significant and sustained (interpreted as 6 months of contributions). That is: when adding a new packageset or PPU uploader, add the individual to ~ubuntu-dev if they are being granted membership or (for PPU only) to ~ubuntu-uploaders if they are not.

An exception to the above is that some packagesets require membership. You can identify these because the uploading teams are a member of ~ubuntu-dev instead of ~ubuntu-uploaders. In these cases applicants must satisfy the membership critera: granting upload rights without membership is not possible.

This is, of course, only the case when adding uploaders. Memberships such as for Ubuntu Contributing Developers, which do not grant any upload rights to the Ubuntu archive, do not require adding the new members to any of the above teams. Those should only be added to ~ubuntu-developer-members.

Applications from DDs

DDs who are PPU through the normal process can apply by email to have their access extended to further packages they (or a team they are a member of) maintain. This only requires one DMB member to agree in order to pass.

DMB Restaffing

Running a DMB election

Election documentation, including DMB specifics, has moved to a dedicated repository here. See README.DMB.

Checklist after a DMB election

• Update:
  • (TB) ~developer-membership-board Launchpad team

  • (TB) developer-membership-board@lists.ubuntu.com membership and then send welcome email

  • (self-subscribe) devel-permissions@lists.ubuntu.com membership

  • Private IRC channel access
  • List of DMB member IRC nicknames in ubottu's !dmb-ping

    • Can be requested by typing: !no dmb-ping is <comma separated list of IRC usernames>: DMB ping.

  • Calendar meeting event invitation list
• Send welcome email to new DMB members (see the previous one)

Accidental Expiry

Since we usually require uploaders to self-renew after some period, sometimes this is missed by an uploader, and they request that we reinstate them shortly after expiry.

The DMB have long established that if it's relatively soon after expiry in the judgement of an individual DMB member, then the uploader can have their membership reinstated without any further consideration.

If it has been some considerable time since the uploader's team membership expired, then a full DMB vote is required as usual, but the DMB has in the past opted not to require a full application (just an agenda item and a quick discussion at the next meeting).

For the "relatively soon" case, the DMB member should use the following process:

1. Make sure the request is available in the archives of devel-permissions@

2. Go to the "Members" page on Launchpad for the team in question (eg. https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/+members)

3. Page to the end to locate the "Former members" section and locate the uploader.
4. Check the "Expired on" date in the "Status" column is relatively recent. If it is not, then stop this process here and ask that the applicant attends a DMB meeting to request reinstatement as discussed above.
5. Using the edit button on the right of the former team member entry, change "Expiration" to "On" using the default date provided, write a suitable comment, and click the "Renew" button.
6. Reply to the devel-permissions@ thread confirming renewal so there is a record in the archive.

Rules and Regulations

This section contains rules for the DMB to use when conducting its business. Changes to these rules should be proposed by a board member and voted on by the board.

Board Member Attendance

This rule was proposed on the mailing list, and approved on 2021-11-05. The final formal wording is from this post and is reproduced here:

Any DMB member who fails to attend 6 consecutive scheduled DMB meetings (during a period no shorter than 12 weeks) shall be considered inactive and removed from membership in the DMB. Since the number of members required for quorum is 1/2 the number of active DMB members, rounded up, the change in the number of active members will affect quorum. At such time as any DMB member is found to be inactive due to this rule, the current DMB chair will add an action item to schedule a public vote for a new DMB member. Previous DMB members, including those changed to inactive due to this rule, are eligible to run in the new election and any later elections. This proposal is not retroactive, and the attendance requirement shall start the first meeting after this proposal is adopted.

Voting and Quorum

The details for this rule, and quorum voting in particular, are not always clear, so the TL;DR for this rule is, any proposal or application that is voted on at a regular meeting must use the process shown in the python function below; if the function does not result in pass or fail, then at the next scheduled meeting, the vote will pass with only a majority of present members (meaning the sum of votes from present members must be greater than 0).

This rule was proposed and approved in a mailing list thread, that was discussed and then extended to a poll for which the results are explained below.

"Quorum votes are required, however if quorum is not reached at first meeting, at the next meeting majority present votes are required"

As quorum can be difficult to parse under all circumstances, an explaination from a ML post (and follow up post for a tie vote) is summarized in this python function, where total_members is the total number of active board members (which is typically 7):

def do_vote(*votes, total_members=7):
  absent = total_members - len(votes)
  net_vote = sum(votes)
  min = net_vote - absent
  max = net_vote + absent
  if min > 0:
    print(f'Vote minimum {min} > 0, vote passes')
  elif max < 0:
    print(f'Vote maximum {max} < 0, vote fails')
  elif min == max == net_vote == 0:
    print(f'Vote is tied, vote fails')
  else:
    print(f'Vote is between {min} and {max}, outcome unknown as quorum was not reached')

This function represents the meaning of quorum votes. Note that if total_members is 7, if the number of voters is less than 4, it is impossible to pass or fail.