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

PROCESS CHANGE: WG leads should be in CNCF's maintainers.csv #1383

Open
aliok opened this issue Jun 15, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

PROCESS CHANGE: WG leads should be in CNCF's maintainers.csv #1383

aliok opened this issue Jun 15, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@aliok
Copy link
Member

aliok commented Jun 15, 2023

During #945 I see TOC and SC members are added to the list in https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/main/project-maintainers.csv.

However, we should have more people there.

For example, Istio has different groups (https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/main/project-maintainers.csv#L1179):

  • Istio: Steering Committee
  • Istio: Technical Oversight Committee
  • Istio: Working Group Leads
  • Istio: Maintainers

We can go with the same structure.

Expected benefits

  • Rewarding the contributors by listing their name there
  • Being able to subscribe to maintainers-only things like some newsletters, etc.
  • Getting rid of the necessity to prove that I am actually a maintainer in Knative project.

Expected costs

  • More people are listed there - shouldn't cause any issue
  • Scripting change

UPDATE: see this comment: #1383 (comment) . We'll add WG leads and not all approvers.

@aliok
Copy link
Member Author

aliok commented Jun 15, 2023

cc @knative/steering-committee

@aliok
Copy link
Member Author

aliok commented Jul 3, 2023

Some notes:

  • If we go with this, SC wants to clean up the peribolos YAML file first as there are usernames there who haven't done any contributions for years
  • To remove people from peribolos, we need to define what are the criteria for that
  • @lance to lead the discussion for those criteria

Also, @csantanapr , it was mentioned that you might have an objection for this. Any comments?

Similarly, @puerco @nainaz @salaboy @nainaz , any comments?

@lance
Copy link
Member

lance commented Jul 3, 2023

  • @lance to lead the discussion for those criteria

I've sent a PR with some language for removal - voluntary and not - in the ROLES.md document here: #1390. Feedback is welcome - there are a few questions and consider it a WIP until we come to agreement.

@aliok
Copy link
Member Author

aliok commented Dec 21, 2023

Update, in SC meeting, we had a vote and agreement for having WG leads in maintainers.csv file as well: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Rpd2nhmLWrkFJUfpJ31Ox2PpultJ-bYIhqaiWQff_I/edit#bookmark=id.8jsaovwwr9fw

Not all approvers, but WG leads (in addition to SC+TOC members)

Updating the ticket description above.

@aliok aliok changed the title PROCESS CHANGE: people with write access to Knative repos should be in CNCF's maintainers.json PROCESS CHANGE: WG leads should be in CNCF's maintainers.json Dec 21, 2023
@aliok aliok changed the title PROCESS CHANGE: WG leads should be in CNCF's maintainers.json PROCESS CHANGE: WG leads should be in CNCF's maintainers.csv Dec 21, 2023
@aliok
Copy link
Member Author

aliok commented Jan 12, 2024

PR cncf/foundation#720

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants