WEB: Governance community members #47706
Conversation
datapythonista
added
Admin
| ### Inactive maintainers | ||
|
|
||
| Inactive maintainers are former active maintainers who are not interested or | ||
| not available to continue contributing to pandas in a regular way. If they |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You'd have to define "regular way".
We have a way to bring people in, but what defines "regular" ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My intention was to provide more an intuition more than a formal definition in this first part, so people understand what this group is about. And in the membership section, define clearer what are the conditions to become part of this group.
In this sense, it's not very relevant what regular exactly implies. And it'd be up to the affected person to decide if they consider that they stopped making contributions in a regular way, and what regular means to them. And clearly that could mean different things for different people. And a maintainer may decide to be considered inactive after one month, and another consider themselves active after 3 years of no contributions. But to me personally this is fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's okay in this introductory paragraph to use "regular" as long as the Membership section is clear what "regular" means.
Co-authored-by: Matthew Roeschke <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Matthew Roeschke <[email protected]>
web/pandas/about/governance.md
Outdated
| of the decision making of the project, not have commit rights to the pandas | ||
| repositories, or be in the maintainers distribution list. | ||
|
|
||
| **Membership**: Active maintainers become inactive by their own decision. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My first proposal for this membership condition:
- An active maintainer that voluntarily notifies the active maintainers to be inactive by their own decision
- An active maintainer that satisfies all of the following:
- Has not been engaged on Github, mailing lists, or any other project communication channel for over 1 year
- Has not responded to an inquiry from the active maintainers, within a 1 month time frame, that they want to remain an active maintainer.
IMO I think having just active/inactive (with whatever title we choose) with a broad condition is sufficient.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm fine with this proposal. I like condition (2), because it then defines a process for the core team to mark people as "inactive", as opposed to waiting for an active person to declare they are inactive.
It also covers the unfortunate case of someone passing away, and the only way we find out is due to the fact that they are non-responsive.
web/pandas/about/governance.md
Outdated
| advance the pandas software and goals. | ||
|
|
||
| **Membership**: Contributors to the pandas project become maintainers after | ||
| showing significant contributions over a period of one year, and with |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe good to note that typically the contributor is nominated by an existing active member before consensus is decided
web/pandas/about/governance.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| The role of the committee is to make sure pandas is as open, transparent and | ||
| inclusive as it aims to be by its values. In particular, the committee will | ||
| monitor and respond to any possible violation of our code of conduct. And |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| monitor and respond to any possible violation of our code of conduct. And | |
| monitor and respond to any possible violation of our code of conduct and |
|
Thanks for the feedback. I addressed all comments. |
… into governance_members
| The Core Team can create subcommittees that provide leadership and guidance for | ||
| specific aspects of the project. Like the Core Team as a whole, subcommittees |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In breaking this section up. we lose this sentence (and any mention of the word subcommittee). I guess that this sentence alone did not give much information but did show the possibility of forming subcommittees.
To avoid increasing the scope of this PR, i'm not suggesting any changes now as we can maybe update the governance again if we feel the need to create a subcommittee but just want to mention in case others have strong views.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point. I added a section about it. I think we should have a "communications committee" too, which can better be discussed later. So, having a section about this seems worth having to me too.
I didn't realize before that I used committee instead of subcommittee in what I wrote. I'm personally happy with anything, committee, subcommittee, workgroup... I guess the idea in the current governance is that the core dev team is a committee and those are subcommittees of it. It felt more natural to call them committees, and also it doesn't seem technically correct to call them subcommittees, as for example the CoC committee is not made only of core devs. In any case, if people prefer to call them subcommittees, or something else, happy to update the PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good point. committee is fine.
| - Participate in the decisions regarding the project funding | ||
| - Have access to the project funding for tasks like maintenance and | ||
| leadership | ||
| - Have voting rights for things that require a voting, such as technical |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
replace "that require a voting" with "that require a vote"
| array of backgrounds, viewpoints and talents in our team, which is why we | ||
| explicitly do not define code as the sole metric on which Core Team membership | ||
| will be evaluated. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the above 2 paragraphs are worth keeping - it shows how we evaluate people to be on the core team
| age, etc. | ||
| - No more than two members of the committee should be pandas maintainers. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Inactive maintainers |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this section should be moved to be right after the section about "Active maintainers"
| further grace period. All former Core Team members can be considered for | ||
| membership again at any time in the future, like any other Project Contributor. | ||
| Retired Core Team members will be listed on the project website, acknowledging | ||
| the period during which they were active in the Core Team. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should keep parts of this paragraph in the "Inactive Maintainers" section as well.
|
|
||
| The Core Team reserves the right to eject current Members, other than the BDFL, | ||
| if they are deemed to be actively harmful to the project’s well-being, and | ||
| attempts at communication and conflict resolution have failed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And keep the above paragraph as well.
| issue, but must recuse themselves from voting on the issue. If the BDFL has | ||
| recused his/herself for a particular decision, they will appoint a substitute | ||
| BDFL for that decision. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this section should remain
|
I think it's too ambitious to try to change the governance at this point. I think the amount of energy and time required to get a document with 80% of core dev approvals is just too much. Closing, maybe things look better in the future. |
xref #47694
Draft of the different groups of the pandas community worth mentioning in the governance. I personally find this format (a concise description with responsibilities, and a section for how membership works) the best. I think it keeps simple, while having all the information so decision making is clear.
The exact content is an initial version what makes sense to me, but feedback more than welcome. I think having an initial proposal make things easier to discuss, but surely things can be improved.
Topics like how a technical decision in the project is made are not in the scope of this PR, and will be addressed separately. What I try to do here is to formalize which are the different groups that are relevant in the pandas community, and when and how people and institutions become part of them, or when stop being part.