-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 134
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Do we need policy on who should be org owners. #289
Comments
The list of owners Whether or not Also, whatever the decision, +1 to more formal documentation! (EDIT: Yes, sometimes people don't get added/removed promptly, so the list can get out of sync with CTC.) |
@Trott perhaps a bit of context. We've been discussing for some time on whether or not members of the TSC should also be org owners. Given everyone on the TSC except me is also on the CTC it's more or less moot right now. However. There is a need for CommComm to have (a select few) of the permissions you can only get by being an org owner, specifically so that CommComm can add members to the org for itself and the teams and working groups it oversees. While we can always ask someone on the CTC add folks, we've found it to be cumbersome so far. In #285, we came to the conclusion that I should be added as an org owner this time around. Since I'm also on the TSC it's not that much of a stretch, but what about next time? Also, there is no documented procedure for who is eligible and how one gets added as an owner. While our past approach may have been methodical, I would claim it still has been ad hoc from a procedural standpoint, because there's nothing that ensures we continue to follow this methodology in the future. |
@nebrius Thanks. That context is very helpful. And yeah, I'd agree that ad hoc in that sense is correct. (Also, I got more than a few details wrong in my original comment and have edited it quite a bit. I tried to use strike-through where preserving the original wrong text might be important--that would be for the stuff I got really wrong.) One minor-but-possibly-important correction to what you wrote: I don't think you're the only person on TSC who is not on CTC. There are two others: Bert and Josh. Since there are already two or three people on CommComm who are CTC, I'm surprised it didn't work to have one or more of them do the org stuff necessary. But if it didn't work well, then it didn't work well. ¯\(ツ)/¯ |
I always forget that Bert stepped down and Josh hasn't been added yet 😅 . I should get better at that.
I'm guessing it's a matter of who's been active when we needed them? FWIW I'm not disparaging those people, it's totally fine, people are busy and whatnot. |
If we can have an active list of org owners specifically somewhere, I think that would be additionally helpful. For CommComm, that allows us to know who to ping or assign a task when we need an admin operation to occur. |
This may change as this conversation works towards a conclusion, but as of right now, the org owners consist of the entire CTC, and that's it. CTC members are listed in the README for the nodejs/node repo. |
Fixes: nodejs#101 Fixes: nodejs#125 Fixes: nodejs#269 Fixes: nodejs#285 Fixes: nodejs#289 Fixes: nodejs#295 Fixes: nodejs#328
In the last TSC meeting when we discussed #125 we decided we should discuss if we need to formalize this or not. Currently we handle it ad-hoc with people being added based on best judgement/need at the time.
The question we want to answer is:
" Is it ok to just continue to operate in this way or do we need a more formal documented policy ? "
Please comment.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: