-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 65
Create MAINTAINERS.md #812
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,90 @@ | ||
| # Maintainers | ||
|
|
||
| The current technical steering committee (TSC) are also maintainers of this repo. More information can be found [here](https://github.com/hiero-ledger/tsc). | ||
|
|
||
| ## Active Maintainers | ||
|
|
||
| | Name | GitHub ID | GitHub Scope | LFID | Discord ID | Email | | ||
| |-----------------|----------------------------------------------|--------------|-------|-------------|----------| | ||
| | | [@rwalworth](https://github.com/rwalworth) | MAINTAIN | | | | | ||
| | | [@SimiHunjan](https://github.com/SimiHunjan) | MAINTAIN | | | | | ||
|
|
||
| ## Emeritus Maintainers | ||
|
|
||
| NONE | ||
|
|
||
| ## The Duties of a Maintainer | ||
|
|
||
| Maintainers are expected to perform the following duties for this repository. | ||
| The duties are listed in more or less priority order: | ||
|
|
||
| - Review, respond, and act on any security vulnerabilities reported against the repository. | ||
| - Review, provide feedback on, and merge or reject GitHub Pull Requests from Contributors. | ||
| - Review, triage, comment on, and close GitHub Issues submitted by Contributors. | ||
| - When appropriate, lead/facilitate architectural discussions in the community. | ||
| - When appropriate, lead/facilitate the creation of a product roadmap. | ||
| - Create, clarify, and label issues to be worked on by Contributors. | ||
| - Ensure that there is a well defined (and ideally automated) product test and release pipeline, | ||
| including the publication of release artifacts. | ||
| - When appropriate, execute the product release process. | ||
| - Maintain the repository CONTRIBUTING.md file and getting started documents to give guidance and | ||
| encouragement to those wanting to contribute to the product, and those wanting to become maintainers. | ||
| - Contribute to the product via GitHub Pull Requests. | ||
| - Monitor requests from the LF Decentralized Trust Technical Advisory Council about the contents | ||
| and management of LFDT repositories, such as branch handling, required files in repositories and so on. | ||
| - Contribute to the LFDT Project's Quarterly Report. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Becoming a Maintainer | ||
|
|
||
| This community welcomes contributions. | ||
| Interested contributors are encouraged to progress to become maintainers. | ||
| To become a maintainer the following steps occur, roughly in order. | ||
|
|
||
| - The proposed maintainer establishes their reputation in the community, | ||
| including authoring five (5) significant merged pull requests, and expresses | ||
| an interest in becoming a maintainer for the repository. | ||
|
Comment on lines
+43
to
+45
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think for us, we distinguish between committers and maintainers, whereas LFDT may not in general. I think the bar to becoming a maintainer is far higher than 5 significant merged pull requests, although for a committer this may be about right. I think we need to revisit this language. Maintainers have voting rights, and that should come with a long history of active participation. |
||
| - A PR is created to update this file to add the proposed maintainer to the list of active maintainers. | ||
| - The PR is authored by an existing maintainer or has a comment on the PR from an existing maintainer supporting the proposal. | ||
| - The PR is authored by the proposed maintainer or has a comment on the PR from the proposed maintainer confirming their interest in being a maintainer. | ||
| - The PR or comment from the proposed maintainer must include their | ||
| willingness to be a long-term (more than 6 month) maintainer. | ||
| - Once the PR and necessary comments have been received, an approval timeframe begins. | ||
| - The PR **MUST** be communicated on all appropriate communication channels, including relevant community calls, chat channels and mailing lists. Comments of support from the community are welcome. | ||
| - The PR is merged and the proposed maintainer becomes a maintainer if either: | ||
| - Two weeks have passed since at least three (3) Maintainer PR approvals have been recorded, OR | ||
| - An absolute majority of maintainers have approved the PR. | ||
| - If the PR does not get the requisite PR approvals, it may be closed. | ||
| - Once the add maintainer PR has been merged, any necessary updates to the GitHub Teams are made. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Removing Maintainers | ||
|
|
||
| Being a maintainer is not a status symbol or a title to be carried | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Just a formatting comment -- some lines are short, some lines are really long. I think we should reformat so we have as a rule 120 chars per line, like we do source files. |
||
| indefinitely. It will occasionally be necessary and appropriate to move a | ||
| maintainer to emeritus status. This can occur in the following situations: | ||
|
|
||
| - Resignation of a maintainer. | ||
| - Violation of the Code of Conduct warranting removal. | ||
| - Inactivity. | ||
| - A general measure of inactivity will be no commits or code review comments | ||
| for one reporting quarter. This will not be strictly enforced if | ||
| the maintainer expresses a reasonable intent to continue contributing. | ||
| - Reasonable exceptions to inactivity will be granted for known long term | ||
| leave such as parental leave and medical leave. | ||
| - Other circumstances at the discretion of the other Maintainers. | ||
|
|
||
| The process to move a maintainer from active to emeritus status is comparable to the process for adding a maintainer, outlined above. In the case of voluntary | ||
| resignation, the Pull Request can be merged following a maintainer PR approval. If the removal is for any other reason, the following steps **SHOULD** be followed: | ||
|
|
||
| - A PR is created to update this file to move the maintainer to the list of emeritus maintainers. | ||
| - The PR is authored by, or has a comment supporting the proposal from, an existing maintainer or a member of the project's Technical Steering Commitee (TSC). | ||
| - Once the PR and necessary comments have been received, the approval timeframe begins. | ||
| - The PR **MAY** be communicated on appropriate communication channels, including relevant community calls, chat channels and mailing lists. | ||
| - The PR is merged and the maintainer transitions to maintainer emeritus if: | ||
| - The PR is approved by the maintainer to be transitioned, OR | ||
| - Two weeks have passed since at least three (3) Maintainer PR approvals have been recorded, OR | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There is no mention of maintainer votes of NO. So suppose less than a majority agree with the PR, so they don't approve the PR. But then after two weeks only 3 maintainer PR approvals were needed to merge the PR. I also assume a single NO by a maintainer is not sufficient, otherwise two bad maintainers colluding together could avoid ever being removed. instead, there has to be some voting process, and I am skeptical that the PR approval process is the best way to do it (since tallying up the results is difficult). |
||
| - An absolute majority of maintainers have approved the PR. | ||
| - If the PR does not get the requisite PR approvals, it may be closed. | ||
|
|
||
| Returning to active status from emeritus status uses the same steps as adding a | ||
| new maintainer. Note that the emeritus maintainer already has the 5 required | ||
| significant changes as there is no contribution time horizon for those. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It would be nice to get this lined up (also it looks like there may be tabs in here)