Add GOVERNANCE.md#78
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Lachlan Evenson <lachlan.evenson@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Lachlan Evenson <lachlan.evenson@microsoft.com>
| vote of the existing maintainers. A potential maintainer may be nominated by an existing maintainer. | ||
| Submissions for new maintainers can be made by creating an | ||
| [issue](https://github.com/notaryproject/notaryproject/issues/new). The current maintainers will cast | ||
| their vote via a +1 comment on the issue. Once a [super-majority](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermajority#Two-thirds_vote) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The current maintainers will cast their vote via a +1 comment on the issue.
How many votes can be cast?
Also, If going off by the codeowners file being introduced as part of this PR, restricting voting to two individuals makes it that supermajority has to be the absolute majority. Worth considering extending the voting to all community members and contributors with demonstrated active engagement.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How many votes can be cast?
A single vote per maintainer. (I will update)
Also, If going off by the codeowners file being introduced as part of this PR, restricting voting to two individuals makes it that supermajority has to be the absolute majority. Worth considering extending the voting to all community members and contributors with demonstrated active engagement.
It might be worth using the linked issue as a seed set of maintainers before putting this into effect so that we can establish a super-majority as noted. We may have to add some verbiage about how the seed maintainers will be selected also. I'll add this to the agenda for the next meeting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's also worth pointing out that the initial maintainers must show a track record of having been publicly actively involved in the project so far. I'm afraid that at least one of them has not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fair point - Do you of any other CNCF projects that have a maintainer definition outside of the spiffe project as I'm taking a look around to see if there is good precedence on maintainer requirements that this project might consider adopting. I also see https://github.com/openservicemesh/osm/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING_LADDER.md#maintainer
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The closest I can find so far is the TUF governance model. We have the equivalent of a "BDFL" who necessarily must remain active in order to remain one. Otherwise, maintainers and the community can initiate, vote for, and enact changes. So, the FL in BDFL is conditional on the community.
Add Governance to TOC Signed-off-by: Lachlan Evenson <lachlan.evenson@microsoft.com>
| vote of the existing maintainers. A potential maintainer may be nominated by an existing maintainer. | ||
| Submissions for new maintainers can be made by creating an | ||
| [issue](https://github.com/notaryproject/notaryproject/issues/new). The current maintainers will be able to cast | ||
| a single vote each via a +1 comment on the issue. Once a [super-majority](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermajority#Two-thirds_vote) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The current maintainers will be able to cast
a single vote each via a +1 comment on the issue.
Does this in practice mean that two votes in total (one by each current maintainer)? If so, both maintainers must cast their votes for the exact same nominee for there to be anyone elected. Or is it, each maintainer can vote just once for every nominee?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The latter. This could change if we prefer the idea of having a fixed number of maintainer seats, then we could do a ranked voting across candidates.
|
Another question - is the CODEOWNERS file here meant to represent the entire project (everything under notaryproject/*) or just this repo? Do we need to repeat this process for all the other repos? |
I would suggest that we repeat this process for all other repos as they could potentially have a different set of maintainers. |
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
| * @justincormack @SteveLasker | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| * @justincormack @SteveLasker | |
| * @notaryproject |
This will allow anyone part of this team to own the code.
|
Handed off this work to @justincormack via notaryproject/notary#1606. Closing this PR in favor of that one. |
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
6 participants
Outline project governance as discussed at the community meeting Friday, June 25
Fixes: #77
cc @SteveLasker @justincormack
Signed-off-by: Lachlan Evenson lachlan.evenson@microsoft.com