Update org owners, define authority and responsibilities #37
Conversation
infinisil
requested review from
domenkozar,
edolstra,
garbas,
zimbatm,
Lassulus and
a team
as code owners
infinisil
force-pushed
the
org-owners
branch
from
9891a51 to
03b2aed
Compare
infinisil
force-pushed
the
org-owners
branch
from
03b2aed to
6f99f49
Compare
|
|
||
| For any GitHub-related needs, you can reach out to the org owners by either: | ||
| - [Creating an issue in this repository](https://github.com/NixOS/org/issues/new). | ||
| - Messaging in the [Github org owners help desk Matrix room](https://matrix.to/#/#org_owners:nixos.org). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe something for later:
I'd like us to standardize using GitHub issues to discuss GitHub-related topics. Spreading information in two places is not optimal for transparency reasons.
infinisil
force-pushed
the
org-owners
branch
from
85501f5 to
40b2460
Compare
|
Applied @zimbatm's suggestions and included some follow-up changes. Here's a more easily viewable diff since y'all approved the last time: https://github.com/NixOS/org/compare/6f99f49dc3a019a67eccf7f1d804ef4b50686edd..40b246011b6c71dfa8fb16eeb72ac68dc22b0986 (this diff also includes #36 due to the rebase force push though) |
|
so we have 4 SC approvals (a majority) and the proposal was created 4 days ago. If I interpret the SCs voting rules correctly that means I can implement those changes and merge this PR? |
|
@Lassulus: I'm going to say: yes. I generally want us to err on the side of doing things. If we make a mistake in interpreting the rules we can always revert it. |
| - Moderation decisions by the moderation team. | ||
| - Changes from approved RFCs. | ||
| - Low-impact changes, such as: | ||
| - Adding new org members to allow review requests. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How do you imagine this to be used? In Nixpkgs, this is handled by commiter delegation team, and in other repos like Nix, I would expect them to have owners who would ideally self-organize.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is just for the issue of people missing the automated org invite they get after adding themselves to lib.maintainers, see NixOS/nixpkgs#234293. An org owner currently needs to resend these missed invites, since there's no automation for that. These invites give no commit access, they're just to allow requesting reviews from maintainers.
doc/github-org-owners.md
Outdated
| - Creating new unprivileged Nixpkgs teams for mention. | ||
| - Updating repository meta information. | ||
|
|
||
| With approval by at least 2 org owners, they can take care of implementing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe make it clearer if the 2 includes the implementer.
| With approval by at least 2 org owners, they can take care of implementing | |
| With approval by at least 2 other org owners, they can take care of implementing |
or
| With approval by at least 2 org owners, they can take care of implementing | |
| With approval by at least one other org owner, they can take care of implementing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The latter, I think this should be even more clear:
| With approval by at least 2 org owners, they can take care of implementing | |
| Org owners need approval from at least one other org owner to take care of implementing |
Co-authored-by: Jonas Chevalier <[email protected]>
infinisil
force-pushed
the
org-owners
branch
from
40b2460 to
ebe9741
Compare
|
Alright, I created a team and made everyone individually an org owner. |
|
@NixOS/org-owners is the team btw :) |
|
@Lassulus No need for a new team, the docs you just merged document @NixOS/org! |
|
ah well, feel free to remove that team :D |
After discussions with the Steering Committee to set the general direction for this, here's a hashed-out proposal by me to update org owners and define their authority and responsibilities.
Needs to be approved by @NixOS/steering before it can be merged. Note that the convention for this repo is that the person merging also implements the changes.
Also note that the first commit is shared with #36.