-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
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
Repository guidline #76
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: qiujian16 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
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.
thanks, we can kick off with such a brief version in the beginning. and the major merit of standardizing the new-repo process i can see is to help us to clarify:
- the goal/non-goal of the repo
- make sure the maintainers working with stable commitment
REPOSITORY.md
Outdated
1. It has been discussed and recognized in the community meeting with a | ||
publicly linkable written decision. | ||
2. It must have two sponsors, each of whom must be the maintainer of a sub project. | ||
3. An repository onboarding issue is created in the community repo. |
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.
typo: s/An/A/
2. It must have two sponsors, each of whom must be the maintainer of a sub project. | ||
3. An repository onboarding issue is created in the community repo. | ||
|
||
## Removing Repositories |
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.
removing sounds like an irrevocable process that completely eliminates the repo, while in kubernetes the sun-setting repos will end up being transferred to https://github.com/kubernetes-retired. i think just explicitly freezing the repo for those project we're not going to move forward will be fine?
REPOSITORY.md
Outdated
# Rules for New Repositories | ||
|
||
* All repos will live in github.com/open-cluster-management-io/\<project-name\>. | ||
* Must contain the topic for the sponsoring sub projects - e.g. application. (Added through the Manage topics link on the repo page.) |
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.
which subproject do you think will the proxy repo belong to?
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.
I have another PR trying to define the existing sub project #75. I am thinking whether it should belong to cluster lifecycle sub project, or we should have a new subproject as Integrations
to include all project that is to integrate with external projects?
REPOSITORY.md
Outdated
|
||
* All repos will live in github.com/open-cluster-management-io/\<project-name\>. | ||
* Must contain the topic for the sponsoring sub projects - e.g. application. (Added through the Manage topics link on the repo page.) | ||
* Must adopt the Open-Cluster-Management Code of Conduct |
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.
missing .
in the end
* All code projects use the Apache License version 2.0. | ||
* All OWNERS of the project must also be active Open-Cluster-Management members. | ||
* Must be approved by the following process. | ||
1. It has been discussed and recognized in the community meeting with a |
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.
e.g. an issue under the this repo?
These are great! We already have some guidelines in GOVERNANCE.md for adding new repositories. These should replace them. Do we want them as a separate file (and then have Governance refer to that file) or do we want to merge these rules into the governance? |
I feel that having this as a separate file will be better. I will copy the related wordings in GOVERNANCE.md to here. |
Signed-off-by: Jian Qiu <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jian Qiu [email protected]