-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 577
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
doc: charter the Release working group #223
Changes from 1 commit
052ba9f
47668c7
624753d
cf51ecc
ff49030
5ec8727
245b46b
d972b76
01c3c72
9f5348d
4de70d7
2e89ab5
7b5ffcd
4eabe3b
43c6d34
3e0022a
2a6c46a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ | |
The Node.js Release Working Group (WG) maintains oversight | ||
over the Node.js Release, Long Term Support (LTS) and | ||
Canary in the Gold Mine (CITGM) teams. It manages the release | ||
and long term support shedule and policies for all Node.js releases. | ||
and long term support schedule and policies for all Node.js releases. | ||
|
||
The WG has final authority over Releases including: | ||
|
||
|
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ For the current list of WG members, see the project README.md. | |
## Collaborators | ||
|
||
The Release GitHub repository is maintained by the WG (all WG | ||
members are Collaborators for the Release respository) and additional | ||
members are Collaborators for the Release repository) and additional | ||
Collaborators who are added by the WG on an ongoing basis. | ||
|
||
Individuals making significant and valuable contributions are made | ||
|
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ are identified by the WG and their addition as Collaborators is discussed | |
during the weekly WG meeting. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. s/weekly/ No longer a weekly meeting There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done |
||
|
||
**Note**: If you make a significant contribution and are not considered for | ||
commit-access, log an issue or contact a WG member directly and it will | ||
commit access, log an issue or contact a WG member directly and it will | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I am not sure this is how the release group should work, was this copied verbatim from the core contribution policy? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Seems like a similar problem that other WGs have—how do you define contributions and how should that be measured to determine membership? Many of them are just "you join enough meetings, hang around and offer to lend a hand where needed and you can join" (Build is a bit like this), or simply just "want to join? sure!". Have we solved this wording anywhere else in our WGs that we can reapply here because the core rules don't seem to apply. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This related to the Release repo where issues/minutes/etc are captured not related to releases themselves so I think it still applies. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We have the same wording in the benchmarking WG, the post-mortem WG, Intl, the now inactive test WG used similar wording. Not a WG but one which is different is the community committee, which uses the participation rules. Basically get involved and once you meet the participation rules you will be added. The rules are:
In my opinion the existing wording is pretty generic in that "significant" can be determined by the WG and I don't think there have been problems with people asking to be added/getting refused. So I'm open to a better suggestion if someone has one but I'm also fine with what we have already. |
||
be brought up in the next WG meeting. | ||
|
||
Modifications of the contents of the Release repository are made | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ The Release working group's purpose is: | |
Its responsibilities are: | ||
|
||
* Define the release process. | ||
* Define the content for releases. | ||
* Define the content of releases. | ||
* Generate and create releases. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done |
||
* Manage the LTS and Current branches including backporting changes to | ||
these branches. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
CITGM
->CitGM
everywhereThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
done