docs: Governance docs Proposal #1848
Conversation
…n making process, and project direction Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
franciscojavierarceo
requested review from
ashwinb,
yanxi0830,
hardikjshah,
dltn,
raghotham,
dineshyv,
vladimirivic,
sixianyi0721,
ehhuang,
terrytangyuan,
SLR722 and
leseb
as code owners
facebook-github-bot
added
the
CLA Signed
docs/source/community/governance.md
Outdated
| At a high level, the key moving parts of the community are: | ||
| - **GitHub activity** (issues + pull requests + discussions) | ||
| - **RFCs** for detailed discussions on new features or changes | ||
| - **Maintainer syncs** (monthly) for [maintainers](https://github.com/meta-llama/MAINTAINERS) to discuss project direction and health |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://github.com/meta-llama/MAINTAINERS does not exist.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, it's a placeholder for now. I can add one now, I was going to defer to the maintainers to do that after approval of this structure.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok we will register a few followup actions then after this is approved.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright, I added a maintainers file with the Meta folks to make it easier.
| * Governance changes are made through PRs to the repository. | ||
| * Lazy consensus applies to governance changes, but the proposed changes must be public for at least 7 days instead of 48 hours before they are accepted. | ||
| * If there is opposition to a change, a vote will be held by maintainers. | ||
| * Voting is asynchronous. All maintainers must be notified of a vote through the maintainer mailing list. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, we don't, we'd need to create one.
Co-authored-by: Sébastien Han <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
docs/source/community/governance.md
Outdated
| time. Maintainers must also act in the interest of the community. | ||
|
|
||
| #### Process | ||
| Any existing maintainer can nominate new maintainers. Once they have been nominated, there will be a vote by the rest |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How does a maintainer express they nominate someone? Is it a PR posted somewhere? Is it proposed verbally somewhere?
| in extreme circumstances. | ||
|
|
||
| Lazy consensus does not apply to becoming a maintainer. A vote must be held. Voting takes place through a maintainer | ||
| mailing list. A vote must stay open for at least 7 days. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The project doesn't have one. Do we need a separate proposal to establish mailing lists for the project? (Does the project have to have a mailing list or can the same effect be achieved in e.g. Discord private channel?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd recommend we create one.
| * (optional) Maintainers voting (if there is active opposition + consensus is not reached through discussion) | ||
| * Decision | ||
|
|
||
| Any community member can make a proposal for consideration by the community. To initiate a discussion about a new idea, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should Discussions ever be used for anything, or do we use issues and PRs only?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have discussions, so I think we should still leave it.
Signed-off-by: Francisco Javier Arceo <[email protected]>
|
Thank you. I'd like to better understand how the nomination process looks like. In some projects I dealt before, it was an email in a public mailing list; in some others it was a PR / issue posted with the nomination. The document here suggests that voting will be in private. Is nomination in private too then? Or is it different? |
| @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ | |||
| # Project Maintainers | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you add @leseb and myself?
| ### Code Owners | ||
|
|
||
| Contributors who have shown that they are committed to Llama Stack's continued development through ongoing engagement | ||
| but may not yet meet the requirements for maintainership can be added to the CODEOWNERS file to review and merge PRs under | ||
| a specific domain. | ||
|
|
||
| CODEOWNERS will generally be the first point of contacts in reviewing pull requests and will have commit privileges. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Need to double check this one - I think folks who are listed on this file need to have write access so there's overlap with "maintainers"
| Any existing maintainer can nominate new triagers, code owners, or maintainers. Once they have been nominated, | ||
| there will be a vote by the rest of the maintainers. Maintainer voting is one of the few activities that takes place in | ||
| private. This is to allow maintainers to express their opinions about a nominee without causing embarrassment freely. | ||
| The approval requires majority vote (>50%) from the maintainers. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do maintainers have veto right?
| mailing list. A vote must stay open for at least 7 days. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| #### Earning a Nomination |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are some templates we can borrow from other projects: https://github.com/argoproj/argoproj/tree/main/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE
What does this PR do?
Proposal for light weight Governance for Llama Stack
Test Plan
N/A