search

keptn / community

Keptn community content: governance, community management, project infrastructure etc.
https://keptn.sh/community
Apache License 2.0
52 stars 46 forks source link

RFE: Retirement of maintainer/approver status #234

Closed mowies closed 9 months ago

mowies commented 1 year ago

Proposal

I want to propose an update to the community membership policies that we have in place right now. Specifically, I want to introduce a clause to remove maintainer and/or approver status from users. I want to give maintainers the option to retire by themselves and become some form of emeritus where they and their contributions are still honored even after their status is removed. Additionally, I want to kind of have a "timeout". After a certain amount of time (e.g. 6 or 12 months) the maintainer/approver status can be removed from members by other maintainers if they didn't perform their duties as maintainers/approvers in that timeframe.

It should also be easier for "emeritus" members to come back to active duty when they want to. This should be enabled by having other maintainers "sponsor" their comeback without necessarily going through the whole membership chain again.

In any case, the organization member status should not be removed by deprecation over time.

I put two links so similar policies from etcd [1] and OTel [2] into the references.

References

[1] https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md#nomination-and-retiring-of-maintainers [2] https://github.com/open-telemetry/community/blob/main/community-membership.md#emeritus-maintainerapprovertriager

Sponsors

Checklist

heckelmann commented 1 year ago

I support

thschue commented 1 year ago

I support this. I think this proposal helps us to keep track of active maintainers with regard to their previous achievements and to give them an easy way back if they want to get active again.

thisthat commented 1 year ago

I also support this. Thanks for the proposal @mowies 🙌

bacherfl commented 1 year ago

I support

StackScribe commented 1 year ago

I support. I especially like the fact that emeriti names will not be erased.

DavidPHirsch commented 1 year ago

looks like a great idea! I would also get approval for the governance committee

bradmccoydev commented 1 year ago

I support

AloisReitbauer commented 1 year ago

We will discuss this in the GC together with @AlexsJones and @AnaMMedina21. I think we overall need a mechanism like this.

I would just like to have a very explicit way how people move to emeritus from active maintainer if - for example - they just no longer show up to meetings etc. My proposal is that the active maintainers first reach out to the non-active member. If they do not engage and do not contribute for more than e.g 6 months the GC can decide to move them to emeritus.

DavidPHirsch commented 1 year ago

To add I would try to define some requirements: APPROVERS in the last 4 months

MAINTAINERS in the last 4 months

Required actions to change to emeritus:

Any other ideas?or any comments?

heckelmann commented 1 year ago

To add I would try to define some requirements: APPROVERS in the last 4 months

  • no code reviews/approvals
  • no active participation in community meetings

MAINTAINERS in the last 4 months

  • approver criteria plus
  • has not authored/reviewed any KEPs
  • has not directly contributed to the subproject through implementation and / or review

Required actions to change to emeritus:

  • [ ] contact person by email/slack or tag in issue
  • [ ] a maintainer should open a PR with the details of the person to be moved to emeritus
  • [ ] TC/GC should be put as reviewers

Any other ideas?or any comments?

Is it

mowies commented 1 year ago

IMHO it's enough if maintainers review the membership change. I don't think it's necessary to involve the TC/GC for that.

DavidPHirsch commented 9 months ago

@mowies maybe we can close this for now, the last discussion was 10 month ago

mowies commented 9 months ago

I still think it's a good idea but sure.