This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 20, 2018. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36
WG Required Documents #40
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@ | ||
# io.js Project Governance | ||
|
||
## Working Group | ||
|
||
The io.js docker project is jointly governed by a Working Group (WG) | ||
which is responsible for high-level guidance of the project. | ||
|
||
The WG has final authority over this project including: | ||
|
||
* Technical direction | ||
* Project governance and process (including this policy) | ||
* Contribution policy | ||
* GitHub repository hosting | ||
* Conduct guidelines | ||
* Maintaining the list of additional Collaborators | ||
|
||
For the current list of WG members, see the project | ||
[README.md](./README.md#people). | ||
|
||
## Collaborators | ||
|
||
The [iojs/docker-iojs](https://github.com/iojs/docker-iojs) GitHub repository is | ||
maintained by the WG and additional Collaborators who are added by the | ||
WG on an ongoing basis. | ||
|
||
Individuals making significant and valuable contributions are made | ||
Collaborators and given commit-access to the project. These | ||
individuals are identified by the WG and their addition as | ||
Collaborators is discussed as a pull request to this project's | ||
[README.md](./README.md#people). | ||
|
||
_Note:_ If you make a significant contribution and are not considered | ||
for commit-access log an issue or contact a WG member directly. | ||
|
||
Modifications of the contents of the iojs/docker-iojs repository are made on | ||
a collaborative basis. Anybody with a GitHub account may propose a | ||
modification via pull request and it will be considered by the project | ||
Collaborators. All pull requests must be reviewed and accepted by a | ||
Collaborator with sufficient expertise who is able to take full | ||
responsibility for the change. In the case of pull requests proposed | ||
by an existing Collaborator, an additional Collaborator is required | ||
for sign-off. Consensus should be sought if additional Collaborators | ||
participate and there is disagreement around a particular | ||
modification. See _Consensus Seeking Process_ below for further detail | ||
on the consensus model used for governance. | ||
|
||
Collaborators may opt to elevate significant or controversial | ||
modifications, or modifications that have not found consensus to the | ||
WG for discussion by assigning the ***WG-agenda*** tag to a pull | ||
request or issue. The WG should serve as the final arbiter where | ||
required. | ||
|
||
For the current list of Collaborators, see the project | ||
[README.md](./README.md#people). | ||
|
||
## WG Membership | ||
|
||
WG seats are not time-limited. There is no fixed size of the WG. | ||
However, the expected target is between 6 and 12, to ensure adequate | ||
coverage of important areas of expertise, balanced with the ability to | ||
make decisions efficiently. | ||
|
||
There is no specific set of requirements or qualifications for WG | ||
membership beyond these rules. | ||
|
||
The WG may add additional members to the WG by unanimous consensus. | ||
|
||
A WG member may be removed from the WG by voluntary resignation, or by | ||
unanimous consensus of all other WG members in an issue or pull request | ||
on the [iojs/docker-iojs](https://github.com/iojs/docker-iojs) repository | ||
|
||
No more than 1/3 of the WG members may be affiliated with the same | ||
employer. If removal or resignation of a WG member, or a change of | ||
employment by a WG member, creates a situation where more than 1/3 of | ||
the WG membership shares an employer, then the situation must be | ||
immediately remedied by the resignation or removal of one or more WG | ||
members affiliated with the over-represented employer(s). | ||
|
||
## WG Meetings | ||
|
||
This working group does not meet. All discussions and decisions happen | ||
in the [iojs/docker-iojs](https://github.com/iojs/docker-iojs) repository | ||
in issues and pull requests. Items can be flagged as needing a board | ||
decision by **WG-agenda** tag to the issue. | ||
|
||
When an issue is tagged with **WG-agenda**, The WG may invite persons or | ||
representatives from certain projects to participate in the discussion in | ||
a non-voting capacity. | ||
|
||
## Consensus Seeking Process | ||
|
||
The WG follows a | ||
[Consensus Seeking](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus-seeking_decision-making) | ||
decision making model. | ||
|
||
All proposed changes to the project must be made in the form | ||
of a pull request to the repository (directly commiting to a production | ||
branch of the repository is not permitted). The consensus seeking process | ||
will then follow via discussion by the WG members on that pull request. | ||
Changes deemed trivial by WG members may be merged instantly by any | ||
WG member, without waiting for consensus, so long as they leave a note | ||
explaining the reason for the merge. | ||
|
||
When an agenda item has appeared to reach a consensus the moderator | ||
will ask "Does anyone object?" as a final call for dissent from the | ||
consensus. | ||
|
||
If an agenda item cannot reach a consensus a WG member can call for | ||
a closing vote. The call for a vote must be seconded by a majority of the WG | ||
or else the discussion will continue. Simple majority wins. | ||
|
||
Note that changes to WG membership require unanimous consensus. See | ||
"WG Membership" above. |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
I'm not thinking this will ever be an issue, but out of curiosity, how will this work in practice when there are no WG meetings? Will the issue be put on hold unit all WG-members have commented? In such a case, will that be contradictory to the consensus seeking process?Update: I think my concerns are pretty much covered by the WG Meetings and Consensus Seeking Process sections.