[libvirt] [PATCH] Write up the project governance process
Martin Kletzander
mkletzan at redhat.com
Tue Feb 4 06:56:12 UTC 2014
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 06:30:24PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> The project has historically operated as a meritocratic
> consensus based community. Formally document what has
> always been an unwritten assumption amongst the community
> participants. Also include an explicit code of conduct
> to prempt any potential, but unlikely, future problems.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange at redhat.com>
> ---
> docs/governance.html.in | 292 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 292 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 docs/governance.html.in
>
> At FOSDEM this past weekend I was asked what the libvirt
> governance process was. While I believe our community
> members already understand all this, and it can be infered
> from behaviour on lists, it will help future new contributors
> to understand how we operate if we actually document it.
> This is likely to be particularly helpful for other companies
> wondering how to get involved in the libvirt project.
>
> diff --git a/docs/governance.html.in b/docs/governance.html.in
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..8bc4e51
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/docs/governance.html.in
[...]
> + <p>
> + Being a committer is a privilege, not a right. In exceptional
> + circumstances, the privilege may be removed from an active
> + contributor. Such decisions will be taken based on "rough
> + consensus" amongst other committers. In the event that a committer
> + is no longer able to participate in the project, after some period
> + of inactivity passes, they may be asked to confirm that they wish
> + to retain their rights as a committer.
This will probably sound as a huge nit-picking, but using "rights as a
committer" at the end of the same paragraph which started "Being a
committer is a privilege, not a right." sounds a bit misleading to me.
[...]
> +
> + <p>
> + To put this into words, any contributor is welcome to make a proposal
> + for consideration. Any contributor may participate in the discussions
> + around the proposal. The discussion will usually result in agreement
> + between the interested parties, or at least agreement between the
> + committers. Only in the very exceptional circumstance where there
> + is disagreement between committers, would a vote be considered.
> + Even in these exceptional circumstances, it is usually found to be
> + obvious what the majority opinion of the committers is. In the event
> + that even a formal vote is be tied, the committers will have to hold
Either "s/is be/is/" or "s/is be/is to be/", I think.
Overall very well put together, ACK.
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20140204/b8145639/attachment-0001.sig>
More information about the libvir-list
mailing list