Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] Write up the project governance process

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(a)redhat.com&gt; --- 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.

+ + <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