Skip to content

update community-membership.md#134

Open
LiZhenCheng9527 wants to merge 1 commit into
volcano-sh:masterfrom
LiZhenCheng9527:update-membership
Open

update community-membership.md#134
LiZhenCheng9527 wants to merge 1 commit into
volcano-sh:masterfrom
LiZhenCheng9527:update-membership

Conversation

@LiZhenCheng9527
Copy link
Copy Markdown

1、Delete Owner membership.
2、Update Maintainer requirement.

Signed-off-by: LiZhenCheng9527 <lizhencheng6@huawei.com>
@volcano-sh-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign kevin-wangzefeng for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request removes the 'Owner' role from the community membership documentation and updates the 'Maintainer' requirements to focus on technical leadership and a super-majority voting process. It also adds a provision for adopter contact persons to become members. Feedback identifies an inconsistency in the summary table where 'owners' are still listed as sponsors for maintainers despite the role's removal, and suggests a minor phrasing and formatting improvement for the maintainer nomination requirement.

Comment thread community-membership.md
| [Reivewer](#reviewer) | Sponsor from 2 maintainers, has basic experience and knowledge of domain, actively contributed to code and review | Review contributions from community members | Write access to specific packages in relevant repository |
| [Approver](#approver) | Sponsor from 2 maintainers, has good experience and knowledge of domain, actively contributed to code and review | Review and approve contributions from community members | Write access to specific packages in relevant repository |
| [Maintainer](#maintainer) | Sponsor from 2 owners, shown good technical judgement in feature design/development and PR review | Participate in release planning and feature development/maintenance | Top level write access to relevant repository. Name entry in Maintainers file of the repository |
| [Owner](#owner) | Sponsor from 3 owners, helps drive the overall Volcano project | Drive the overall technical roadmap of the project and set priorities of activities in release planning | Volcano GitHub organization Admin access |
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

medium

The removal of the Owner role creates an inconsistency in the summary table on line 13. The Maintainer entry still lists 'Sponsor from 2 owners' as a requirement. This should be updated to align with the new nomination and voting process described in the Maintainer section.

Comment thread community-membership.md
- Authoring and reviewing proposals
- Initiating, contributing and resolving discussions (e.g. emails, GitHub issues, meetings)
- Identifying subtle or complex issues in designs and implementation PRs
- Nominated by a maintainer and pass super-majority(two-thirds/ 66.66%) vote.
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

medium

There is a missing space before the parenthesis, and the phrasing 'pass super-majority' is slightly awkward. Adding spaces around the slash also improves readability.

Suggested change
- Nominated by a maintainer and pass super-majority(two-thirds/ 66.66%) vote.
- Nominated by a maintainer and passing a super-majority (two-thirds / 66.66%) vote.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants