michaelkirk
commented
3 weeks ago I think georust has historically been very light on policy. As far as I know, the only things we've codified are in https://github.com/georust/meta/blob/master/GUIDELINES.md
What this means in practice is that many things are left up to the individual repository owners. Often this is the historic creator of the crate, before it was moved into georust.
For write permissions in particular, historically, most georust repos have been very liberal - if you are in https://github.com/orgs/georust/teams/core you can write to most georust repositories.
I feel like this has encouraged people to broaden their contributions to adjacent repositories, and helps share the maintenance burden. This hasn't bitten us yet, as people tend to only merge things that are uncontroversial or that they are relatively expert in. If anything, I think georust contributors are too conservative when exercising their write permissions, but that's just my opinion.
crates.io publishing permissions, on the other hand, are more restricted.
Beyond "write", or "maintain" permissions, we don't have a specific policy. If the existing repo managers want to delegate this responsibility to others, they can.
After #34, just wanted to ask if write/maintain permissions under the GeoRust organization is handled on a repo by repo basis (i.e. at the discretion of the maintainers)? Are there repo-specific teams used to organize permissions?