Open 04kash opened 1 month ago
One final criteria could be 'Additional member approved by existing community plugins maintainers'
Being active in the Backstage repo itself as well as running a Backstage instance at an Organization would be really helpful to have. I would personally weigh these things higher than what is noted in this issue description.
Being active in the Backstage repo itself as well as running a Backstage instance at an Organization would be really helpful to have. I would personally weigh these things higher than what is noted in this issue description.
I agree with those as supporting contributions as they're useful for general context. But, I would imagine contributing to the backstage/backstage
repository itself should be a pathway to backstage/backstage
core maintainership. Exhaustive contributions to backstage/community-plugins
repository alone should be enough for someone to be a Community Plugins area maintainer. As the project is grows, I don't think it'll be reasonable to expect contributors to be across all spaces.
We already have some docs here: https://github.com/backstage/community/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md#project-area-maintainer Happy to iterate if there is anything that can be improved
📜 Description
As discussed in the SIG, we need explicit guidelines on how to transition from a plugin owner to a plugins maintainer within the community-plugins repository.
Here are some suggested criteria to include:
Thoughts?
👍 Expected behavior
We have explicit guidelines on how to transition from a plugin owner to a plugins maintainer within the community-plugins repository
👎 Current Behavior
We don't have explicit guidelines on how to transition from a plugin owner to a plugins maintainer within the community-plugins repository
👟 Reproduction steps
NA
📃 Provide the context for the Bug.
No response
👀 Have you spent some time to check if this bug has been raised before?
🏢 Have you read the Code of Conduct?
Are you willing to submit PR?
Yes I am willing to submit a PR!