Add Ubuntu Kernel DKMS Uploaders delegation page

[m-pellizzer]

Add documentation for the Ubuntu Kernel DKMS Uploaders delegated team, including member profile, application requirements, and application process.

[teward]

Not on the reviewers list or the DMB, but this is premature, because to my knowledge there is no delegation yet.

[m-pellizzer]

It is premature indeed. The validity of this PR depends on the DMB decision about this request: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2026-April/003015.html

[teward]

I've converted this to a draft for the very reason it is premature to have this as an actual merge request until the DMB rules on delegation.

[basak]

-1 from me. Reasoning here: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2026-April/003023.html

[cpaelzer]

I'd like to give this a +1 as I did in the DMB meeting when this was discussed.

• My +1 is about landing the hereby clarified documentation of the expectations for to be added to the DKMS team.
• And it is +0.5 about who now really will make the decision - that isn't so important to me

I do not yet have a clear answer to Robie asking "why do you need the delegation", that is for the kernel team to answer.

But I see a lot of benefit in writing down the exact expectations to be added to this special team. The reason I like this, is because the former cases that didn't work out that well were mostly about uncertainty in regard to the expectations and then failing due to that.

In my perception this is not about "bypassing and now waving them through internally" but more about "let us put down what exactly is expected", which is good.

It is quite similar to what we did in the DMB for general applications - a lot of documentation updates about what we expect. And that seems to have helped, we have no more seen applicants that were shocked about our questions and expectations. Maybe this PR here helps with exactly the same, but in the area of DKMS uploaders.

As communicated in the DMB meeting, I was giving them the benefit of a doubt and the favor of clearly seeing that they now try to do it better. We did already request in that DMB meeting that "if we implement it we (=DMB) would like to see the first few applications too to check if you do that well". That to me appeared much nicer than not trusting it now because there were problems in the past.

But that aspect could be part of the compromise - maybe we do not delegate it at all, but land the definition of the expectations? Maybe the DMB does the first few applications and then it becomes a delegation? Or any in between.

[m-pellizzer]

I tried to state more clearly why we think a delegation is needed in the mailing list:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/devel-permissions/2026-April/003032.html