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

Add a GOVERNANCE file #92

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

silvin-lubecki
Copy link
Collaborator

It describes what is the role of maintainers and how one can become maintainer.

image

@silvin-lubecki
Copy link
Collaborator Author

PTAL @radu-matei and @carolynvs 🙏


New maintainers can be added to the project by a [super-majority](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermajority#Two-thirds_vote) vote of the existing maintainers.

A maintainer may step down by submitting an [issue](https://github.com/cnabio/cnab-to-oci/issues/new) stating their intent.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In practice, I have seen that we have been having maintainers submit a pull request removing themselves from CODEOWNERS and then having the normal number of reviewers (not a supermajority) approve the PR.


[Project maintainers](CODEOWNERS) are responsible for activities around maintaining and updating CNAB-TO-OCI, a library for the [CNAB spec](https://github.com/cnabio/cnab-spec). Final decisions on the project reside with the project maintainers.

Maintainers MUST remain active. If they are unresponsive for >3 months, they will be automatically removed unless a [super-majority](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermajority#Two-thirds_vote) of the other project maintainers agrees to extend the period to be greater than 3 months.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I realize that we probably copied this from elsewhere, but "automatically" implies that there is an automated process which I don't believe we have.

It may be a good idea to spell out who does the removing. For example, "If they are unresponsive for >3 months, another maintainer may submit a pull request to remove them from CODEOWNERS requiring X approvers unless ..." where X is the usual number of approvers for any other PR.

Otherwise, in my experience people really never get removed because it's awkward and no one knows how to go about it because it's not spelled out.

@radu-matei
Copy link
Member

This is the same governance document as the spec repo.
There is also a governance document in the community repo.

If we want to make changes, I would like for the various governance documents for projects to be consistent (and ideally in the same place?)

@carolynvs
Copy link
Collaborator

community is a good place to put template documents

…how one can become maintainer.

Signed-off-by: Silvin Lubecki <silvin.lubecki@docker.com>
@silvin-lubecki
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Rebased onto master

@silvin-lubecki
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I agree with @radu-matei that if we change something to the governance then it should be at the organization level. And I agree too with @carolynvs that we should change the process because we don't respect it strictly in practice. We should add this point to the agenda of the next community meeting 👍

@silvin-lubecki
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Bullet point added on the agenda.

Base automatically changed from master to main February 5, 2021 18:22
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

3 participants