Ensure community roles represent the current practices

mx-psi commented 1 month ago

Currently we recognize four active role levels that are applicable to all repositories and SIGs: member, triager, approver and maintainer. I think this hierachy is useful but it fails to recognize some practices/realities in some SIGs:

Some SIGs such as the Collector SIG and the Go SIG also have codeowners: members that own a specific component and are expected to review this component specifically.
We tie time investment to the project with expertise on the project. While the two are related, there are folks that have a lot of expertise on a topic but can't have a lot of time investment. This means we have to choose between giving people a role they can't fully fulfill or failing to recognize their expertise and having them recognized as valuable contributors.

I would like to have this as a meta issue for anything related to the community roles, but for working on it we can split it per specific problem.

svrnm commented 1 month ago

Good call out, thanks!

Re: codeowners, we can and should add them to the community membership document, especially outlining what their responsibilites and privileges are, and maybe have a group for them like @open-telemetry/collector-component-owners etc, this group may have no immediate use beyond them being part of it.

mx-psi commented 2 days ago

Here is the guide we currently have on the Collector about code owners and how they work: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector-contrib/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#becoming-a-code-owner

open-telemetry / sig-contributor-experience

Ensure community roles represent the current practices #20