Exchange Between the Ubuntu Community Council and the Kubuntu Council
skitterman.wordpress.com
skitterman.wordpress.com
The Ubuntu “Community Council” sends, apparently out of the blue, a “request” to the Kubuntu leader that he resign his position. They give reasonable-sounding but vague reasons, and with no references to back them up. When he refuses, Mark Shuttleworth weighs in and clarifies that it isn’t really a request. Numerous people claim that they can’t find any evidence of the reasons that the CC gave. It also is mentioned that the Kubuntu leader has tried to raise a licensing issue with Ubuntu for some time but has not gotten a satisfactory reply, and so has continued to raise it. The CC seems to be disinclined to discuss any future of Kubuntu which includes him as its elected leader.
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with either Ubuntu or Kubuntu. I am a Debian Maintainer (not a Developer, just a Maintainer), and I maintain a Debian package. This package has been included in the Ubuntu “universe” component, but I don’t maintain it in Ubuntu except to notify Ubuntu of new releases. This is the extent of my current association with Ubuntu.
http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2015/03/19/%23ubuntu-meeting.html#...
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-community-team/2015...
To me it seems that there is a frustration at the lack of progress in the answering of legal questions. That in turn has created friction.
The truth is that they are all correct from their own points of view. Jonathan Riddell is complaining that the council are not doing enough, whilst the council are waiting on lawyers but still keeping things active.
My biggest question on this would be whether Jonathan Riddell could quit and claim constructive dismissal? If this were a company (and its kind of mixed in) it could be considered that technically he's done nothing wrong in a legal sense to earn a demotion. He would have had to have been given a couple of official warning first.