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

On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 06:30:24PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > 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. This will probably sound as a huge nit-picking, but using "rights as a committer" at the end of the same paragraph which started "Being a committer is a privilege, not a right." sounds a bit misleading to me.