Draft governance model #3188
Draft governance model #3188
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3188 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 89.62% 89.63% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 28 28
Lines 31969 32004 +35
Branches 5873 5879 +6
==========================================
+ Hits 28653 28688 +35
Misses 1886 1886
Partials 1430 1430
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
|
||
| - proposing, discussing, or reviewing a change to the code, documentation, or specification | ||
| via a GitHub pull request to the above repositories; | ||
| - reporting a GitHub issue or starting a discussion on the above repositories; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the process for someone getting added to the github org? (I don't know, just asking the question for visibility)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to set this up and have a clean out of permissions across the repos. It's under settings on the org page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I meant what's the process for deciding whether someone should be in the Org or not. That's something we should document
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sounds good but in vague terms; too prescriptive might go out of date (as for instance perhaps possible github roles change)
perhaps some general principles - like "the steering committee will choose roles in the github org so that X Y and Z"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah I see this has been added below
| - [kastore - key-value store](http://github.com/tskit-dev/kastore) | ||
| - [administrative](http://github.com/tskit-dev/administrative) | ||
| - [.github - common config](http://github.com/tskit-dev/.github) | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great to have this laid out. Do we want explicitly say the other repos on the tskit-dev workspace (e.g. tscompress, tsinfer) may become the responsibility of other maintainers if need be, or is that too prescriptive?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought about this, but decided, as they are out of scope for this document, that it shouldn't say anything about them.
|
I like this. Not too heavyweight, just does what's needed. +1 from me. |
|
Looks great to me-- simple and transparent. |
GOVERNANCE.md
Outdated
| via a GitHub pull request to the above repositories; | ||
| - reporting a GitHub issue or starting a discussion on the above repositories; | ||
|
|
||
| Potential contributors are encouraged to read and abide by the [CODE OF CONDUCT](https://github.com/tskit-dev/.github/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Potential contributors are encouraged to read and abide by the [CODE OF CONDUCT](https://github.com/tskit-dev/.github/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md). | |
| Potential contributors are expected to abide by the [CODE OF CONDUCT](https://github.com/tskit-dev/.github/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I put "encouraged" as the contributors are "potential" but I agree that stronger wording here is better. Maybe even remove the "potential" e.g. "contributors are required to abide by"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
or even "contributors must abide by"
Co-authored-by: Peter Ralph <petrel.harp@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Peter Ralph <petrel.harp@gmail.com>
GOVERNANCE.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| Decisions about the future of the project are made through discussion with all | ||
| members of the community. All non-sensitive project management discussion takes | ||
| place on the issue trackers of the appropriate repositories. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| place on the issue trackers of the appropriate repositories. | |
| place in the issue trackers of the appropriate repositories | |
| or other public forums. |
GOVERNANCE.md
Outdated
| Decisions about the future of the project are made through discussion with all | ||
| members of the community. All non-sensitive project management discussion takes | ||
| place on the issue trackers of the appropriate repositories. | ||
| Where possible decisions and discussions of the steering council should be documented as issues on the [administrative](https://github.com/tskit-dev/administrative) repository. Sensitive discussion may occur via email to admin@tskit.dev. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the idea about emailing admin? to have record of things? I'd vote to remove the last sentence?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was a way to encourage things not to go through personal email as the admin address will have a record for all the SC members. I get your point that this maybe promotes that too much. Removed in 06ac675
I've created this PR on the
tskitrepo for visibility - eventually this will live at https://github.com/tskit-dev/administrative.Following the meeting and discussion yesterday, I've written up what I consider to be the lightest, yet focused and meaningful, governance policy for the core repositories.
Please provide your feedback on this, even if it's just a +1 if you're happy, as we'd like community consensus on this.