Docker Working Group proposal

[pesho]

This is a proposal and preliminary discussion about forming a new Docker Working Group within io.js. Refs #29. Working Groups are described here.

Possible WG charter (draft):

Docker WG

The Docker working group's purpose is to build, maintain, and improve official Docker images for the io.js project.

Its responsibilities are:

• Keep the official Docker images updated in line with new io.js releases
• Decide and implement image improvements
• Maintain and improve the images' documentation

We also need at least 3 initial WG members (the more the better IMO). Here is an alphabetical list of possible candidates who have contributed in the past (please respond if you would like/dislike to join):

@hmalphettes
@jlmitch5
@pesho
@rvagg
@Starefossen
@wblankenship

There have also been significant contributions from @jfrazelle, @tianon, @yosifkit from the Docker team, who are of course welcome to join if they wish.

Also /cc @mikeal

Thoughts?

[jessfraz]

You can feel free to continue to ping me on whatever patches etc :) I enjoy
a nice break from the large influx of stuff to docker. But I would hate to
commit to be a maintainer and let you all down when I have other maintainer
responsibilities for the docker project. But do feel free to ping me on
whatever. You all are awesome :D

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Peter Petrov [email protected]
wrote:

This is a proposal and preliminary discussion about forming a new Docker
Working Group within io.js. Refs #29
#29. Working Groups are
described here https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/WORKING_GROUPS.md
.

Possible WG charter (draft):

Docker WG

The Docker working group's purpose is to build, maintain, and improve
official Docker images for the io.js project.

Its responsibilities are:

• Keep the official Docker images updated in line with new io.js
  releases

• Decide and implement image improvements

• Maintain and improve the images' documentation

  We also need at least 3 initial WG members (the more the better IMO).
  Here is an alphabetical list of possible candidates who have contributed in
  the past (please respond if you would like/dislike to join):

@hmalphettes https://github.com/hmalphettes
@jlmitch5 https://github.com/jlmitch5
@pesho https://github.com/pesho
@rvagg https://github.com/rvagg
@Starefossen https://github.com/Starefossen
@wblankenship https://github.com/wblankenship

There have also been significant contributions from @jfrazelle
https://github.com/jfrazelle, @tianon https://github.com/tianon,
@yosifkit https://github.com/yosifkit from the Docker team, who are of
course welcome to join if they wish.

Also /cc @mikeal https://github.com/mikeal

Thoughts?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#39.

Jessie Frazelle
4096R / D4C4 DD60 0D66 F65A 8EFC 511E 18F3 685C 0022 BFF3
pgp.mit.edu http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x18F3685C0022BFF3

[Starefossen]

I would very much like to be a part of the Docker Working Group 🐳

[tianon]

I'd echo what Jess said -- I don't want you guys relying on me too much, but I'm happy to take part and provide input where I can, especially since being involved in changes here helps with the review after the official-images PR (since all the changes and rationale for them are already familiar). 👍

[yosifkit]

I'll also stick to the sidelines with @tianon; watching so that the official-images PRs can go smoothly. Feel free to ping and ask questions about the official images if need arise.

[hmalphettes]

I would also like to join the Docker WG.

[pesho]

Ok, we have the required 3 initial WG members (@hmalphettes, @pesho, @Starefossen). Let's wait 24 more hours, in case more people would like to join, or if there are any other suggestions. After that I'll submit our request to the TC.

[rosskukulinski]

@pesho I haven't made any contributions (yet), but I have been following the work done here and would like to volunteer to be a 4th WG member. I'm also a member of the Evangelism WG.

[pesho]

@rosskukulinski thanks for volunteering 👍 I'm ok with you joining as an initial member, if the others agree as well.

[retrohacker]

I'm on board 😄

[pesho]

Awesome 👍

[hmalphettes]

+1 from here to @rosskukulinski as an initial member.

[jlmitch5]

Yes, I would like to join! I'm on vacation right now, and I'm sorry for responding at the last minute!

[pesho]

Proposal submitted: nodejs/node#1134

@rosskukulinski sorry, I didn't include you in the initial member list. The rules for starting a WG say that the initial members "should be individuals already undertaking the work described in the charter", I hadn't noticed that before. Of course, you are welcome to join later, after you've had a chance to contribute.

[rosskukulinski]

No problem! I'll continue to lurk and help out where I can. I have some
designated open source time next week, so you'll hear more from me.

How do g'all usually communicate? iRC? Gittim? Just github issues?

On Thursday, March 12, 2015, Peter Petrov [email protected] wrote:

Proposal submitted: nodejs/node#1134
nodejs/node#1134

@rosskukulinski https://github.com/rosskukulinski sorry, I didn't
include you in the initial member list. The rules
https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/WORKING_GROUPS.md for starting
a WG say that the initial members "should be individuals already
undertaking the work described in the charter", I hadn't noticed that
before. Of course, you are welcome to join later, after you've had a chance
to contribute.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#39 (comment).

[retrohacker]

@rosskukulinski we are communicating primarily through github issues right now. I accidentally created a gitter via #32 so it exists but is currently unusued.

[retrohacker]

I opened a pull request for a governance document for if/when our request to become a wg is approved: #40

[Starefossen]

@wblankenship this was approved by the last TC meeting, wasn't it?

[rvagg]

yes

[retrohacker]

@Starefossen Will get the final documents updated and ready to go tonight 😄

[Starefossen]

The working group docs has been merged so this issue can now be closed. Should we make a docker team and add the members as collaborators for this repo maybe?

[pesho]

Yes. This has been requested in nodejs/node#1134, I'm not sure what's the holdup there. @rvagg @mikeal can one of you guys take a look.

[retrohacker]

Let's either keep it open until nodejs/node#1134 is resolved or open a new issue to track it from this repo.

[pesho]

Mission completed :)