Merge pull request #244 from ctlong/rfc-approver-requirements

Add RFC for approver requirements

toc/rfc/rfc-draft-approver-requirements.md

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+## Meta
+[meta]: #meta
+- Name: Approver Requirements
+- Start Date: 2022-04-08)
+- Author(s): @ameowlia, @ctlong
+- Status: Draft
+- RFC Pull Request: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/community/pull/244
+
+## Summary
+
+Change the requirements for nominating an Approver to allow for a wider range of
+contributions to be accepted.
+
+## Problem
+
+The current criteria that must be met in order to be nominated as an approver
+are very narrow. Not every working group receives PRs frequently, providing
+scant opportunity for folks to review them in order to be considered for
+nomination as an approver. Additionally, other valuable functions within working
+groups (ie. reviewing Issues, answering Slack questions, etc.) are ignored as
+options to be considered for nomination.
+
+## Proposal
+
+We want to consider a wider range of engagement for consideration when
+nominating approvers. This RFC proposes to change the [language in the approver
+requirements](https://github.com/cloudfoundry/community/blob/main/toc/ROLES.md#requirements-2)
+to the following:
+
+**Requirements**
+* Be a reviewer for at least 3 months
+* Have completed at least 20 of the following
+  * Submitted a substantial PR
+  * Reviewed a substantial PR
+  * Submitted a substantial Issue
+  * Reviewed a substantial Issue
+  * Involved in technical discussion. This includes, but is not limited to,
+    being involved in technical decision making in proposals or resolving
+    interrupts in slack.
+* Nominated by a WG lead (with no objections from other leads).
+
+A substantial PR is anything that changes the logic of the code or introduces a
+complex amount of documentation. The following are examples of substantial PRs:
+bug fixes, features, large docs changes like creating a new debugging document
+or new architecture diagram. The following are examples of non-substantial PRs:
+dependabot PRs or small docs changes like fixing typos or reorganizing content.
+
+A substantial Issue is anything that requires knowledge of the codebase. The
+following are examples of substantial Issues: feature requests, bug write ups,
+debugging help requests. The following are examples of non-substantial Issues:
+minor doc change requests.
+
+A technical discussion is a thread on slack or in GitHub that requires knowledge
+of the codebase. The following are examples of technical discussions that will
+be considered: resolving interrupts in slack, or commenting on proposals.
+Technical discussions are counted per-thread, not per-message.
+
+The WG lead has final say if an issue, PR, or discussion is considered
+substantial.