Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

initial maintainers and governance framework #31

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

diskwarrior
Copy link
Collaborator

@diskwarrior diskwarrior commented Jan 16, 2021

  • define expectations for PR reviews
  • add process for Issues
  • flush out governance definitions

Copy link

@chchang6 chchang6 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Comments are inline in the review.


|Maintainer|Role|
|---|---|
|*Dan Harris|CSC Operations|

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We may want to keep the roles aligned with recognized Center categories (groups, teams, etc.). So maybe CSC Operations is ACO (group) or User Operations (team); CSC Applications would be CSSO (group) or User and Applications Support (team). I like the team labels, as it raises visibility of the things we do within the Center and the groups.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 on teams

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
# Maintainer Guidelines

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We might benefit from a sense of the Git-fu a maintainer should have. For those who aren't able to develop that level, is there a different workflow than the more advanced folks? Maybe a "Content Maintainer" would work through the Github interface only on existing material via the editing interface and the master branch, and a "Content Creator" would have more expectations around PRs, reviews, creation, branches, merging, etc.

Reading further, I think I see now the intent. I'm a little concerned that the iterative PR/review process is heavyweight enough to put some folks off of contributing. What might a process be for someone who has ideas for improvement, but doesn't have a Git background?


It is every maintainer's responsibility to:

* Expose a clear roadmap for improving the repository.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"Expose" is a little vague. I think Lex may be the only project I've seen at NREL with a clear roadmap, and even that might be debated by those who were doing the work. Not sure what this bullet means.


### I'm a maintainer, should I make pull requests too?

Yes. Nobody should ever push to master directly. All changes should be

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are the various dev branches expected to go away once this repo reaches a certain maturity? If not, are direct pushes to a branch other than master permitted?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree I think we need to clarify this more. Master (code samples) and gh-pages should both not be pushed to directly. Archived should also probably be not pushed to.

My opinion is creating dev branches in the repo works for maintainers, makes it easier to collaborate among ourselves compared to forking -> PR. Here direct pushes should be allowed. Contributors would do the fork->PR workflow.

### How are maintainers removed?

When a maintainer is unable to perform the [required duties](#what-are-a-maintainers-responsibilities) they can be removed by the [governance procedure](GOVERNANCE.md).
Issues related to a maintainer's performance should be discussed with them among the other maintainers so that they are not surprised by a pull request removing them.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this sentence belong in the governance procedure under Removing maintainers, or here?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Governance makes more sense, but a quick link here doesn't hurt either.

@KevinSayers
Copy link
Contributor

I think we might want to reverse the content of these files based on looking at a couple other repos. It looks like MAINTAINERS.md should be a list of maintainers and GOVERNANCE.md should be the guidelines.

https://github.com/goharbor/community
https://github.com/containerd/project


### I'm a maintainer, should I make pull requests too?

Yes. Nobody should ever push to master directly. All changes should be
Copy link
Contributor

@KevinSayers KevinSayers Mar 2, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should add branch rules to prevent pushing to master and the gh-pages branch. Also I suggest we change master branch to something more descriptive.

@yandthj
Copy link
Collaborator

yandthj commented Mar 8, 2022

Some examples for a section that outlines our requirements/process for approving pull requests:

https://www.prestashop-project.org/maintainers-guide/reviewing-pull-requests/
https://www.prestashop-project.org/maintainers-guide/summary-github-lifecycle/

@yandthj yandthj self-requested a review April 6, 2022 13:33
|Maintainer|Role|
|---|---|
|*Dan Harris|CSC Operations|
|*Kevin Sayers|CSC Applications|
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We probably need to update this table

### How are maintainers removed?

When a maintainer is unable to perform the [required duties](#what-are-a-maintainers-responsibilities) they can be removed by the [governance procedure](GOVERNANCE.md).
Issues related to a maintainer's performance should be discussed with them among the other maintainers so that they are not surprised by a pull request removing them.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Governance makes more sense, but a quick link here doesn't hurt either.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants