Add goverance.md for OCM incubation checks. - #205
Conversation
xuezhaojun
changed the title
xuezhaojun
changed the title
|
/assign @qiujian16 |
|
/assign @mikeshng |
mikeshng
left a comment
mikeshng
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for taking the time and writing this! I am ok with everything that is stated here. Just some nits.
|
|
||
| # Project Governance | ||
|
|
||
| The project consists of the following Subprojects: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How do we define subprojects here? Based on the CNCF incubation checkbox:
If the project has subprojects: subproject leadership, contribution, maturity status documented, including add/remove process.
So, Registration, Work, Scheduling, Operator might not be the Subprojects, and we should list addon-framework, sdk-go and clusteradm here.
What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And refer to the example in https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/main/projects/cubefs/cubefs-graduation-dd.md?plain=1#L213, the below governance template should be added to each subproject:
Governance
- < subproject-name > is a sub-project of the OCM main project, complying with the rules of OCM main projects.
- < subproject-name > does not have independent leadership, adopting the same leadership strategy as the OCM main project.
- Contributions to < subproject-name > are equivalent to contributions to the main project and can be used as a basis for community role promotion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good question, we should discuss this in the incubation meeting.
|
|
||
| ## Subproject Categories | ||
|
|
||
| ### Core Subprojects |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seperate the subprojects into Core and Extensions and Addons
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure if Core Subprojects is a commonly used term. Refer to the checkbox, my understanding is we just need to list Project (core) and Subprojects (Extensions and Addons).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, project (core) seems better to me also.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree, updated to Core and SubProject, please take another look, thanks!
|
@qiujian16 @haoqing0110 The doc updated, please take another look! Thanks! |
| - [SDK](https://github.com/open-cluster-management-io/sdk-go) - Go SDK for OCM | ||
|
|
||
| **Core Subproject Requirements:** | ||
| - Maintained by OCM core maintainers and approved contributors |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure what is the difference between core maintainers and approved contributors.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
core maintainers are owners who only need /lgtm
approved contributors need /lgtm and /approve to merge a PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what does approved contributors mean? what is the difference from other contributors?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see the confusing point... the approved contributors is removed now.
| **Core Subproject Requirements:** | ||
| - Maintained by OCM core maintainers and approved contributors | ||
| - Follow strict release cycles and version compatibility guarantees | ||
| - Adhere to high code quality standards and comprehensive testing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do we need this as a requirement? I think provide long-term support and stability commitments is good enough.
| - Release cycles, versioning, and quality standards are determined by project maintainers | ||
| - Project maintainers are responsible for maintenance, security responses, and community management | ||
|
|
||
| ## Core Subproject Governance |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| ## Core Subproject Governance | |
| ## Core Project Governance |
| ## Core Subproject Governance | ||
|
|
||
| All active Maintainers of each Core Subproject, as defined in the Contributor Ladder, are | ||
| members of that subproject's Maintainer Committee, which governs that subproject. The |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
subproject's Maintainer Committee is confusing. We only need to state the responsibility of the maintainer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure，removed all maintainer commitee.
|
|
||
| - Ensuring that the subproject creates and publishes regular, stable releases following OCM release cycles; | ||
| - Maintaining version compatibility guarantees and migration paths; | ||
| - Holding regular, subproject-wide discussions on issues and planning; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not think we need a steering committee for each sub project. A steering committee for the whole project is fine.
The responsibility of here seems mainly for steering committee.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree, remove the steering committee part of subproject.
Signed-off-by: xuezhaojun <zxue@redhat.com>
|
/approve looks good in the overall shape. We can iterate based on this. /assign @mikeshng |
mikeshng
left a comment
mikeshng
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
/approve
/lgtm
Thanks for this one!
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mikeshng, qiujian16, xuezhaojun The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
251aa14
into
open-cluster-management-io:main
4 participants
Fixes issue: #196
The sections:
Decision making,CoC,Steering Committee/Membersare new, others are copied from #72