forked from lix-project/lix
![Valentin Gagarin](/assets/img/avatar_default.png)
so far there were no even remotely measurable objectives, only a general purpose statement. this change is intended to focus the team's work on what I (and many others I talked to) perceive to be the main pain point in the development process. Co-authored-by: solene.rapenne@tweag.io
123 lines
4.9 KiB
Markdown
123 lines
4.9 KiB
Markdown
# Nix maintainers team
|
||
|
||
## Motivation
|
||
|
||
In order to attract more maintainers and thereby scale the development process to match user needs, the main goal of this team is to improve the Nix contributor experience.
|
||
|
||
### Objectives
|
||
|
||
- It is obvious what is worthwhile to work on.
|
||
- It is easy to find the right place in the code to make a change.
|
||
- It is clear what is expected of a pull request.
|
||
- It is predictable how to get a change merged and released.
|
||
|
||
### Tasks
|
||
|
||
- Elaborate contribution guides and abide to them
|
||
- Improve documentation targeted to contributors
|
||
- Maintain the issue tracker and triage pull requests
|
||
- Help competent contributors succeed with their pull requests
|
||
- Ensure the required maintainer capacity for all of the above
|
||
|
||
## Members
|
||
|
||
- Eelco Dolstra (@edolstra) – Team lead
|
||
- Théophane Hufschmitt (@thufschmitt)
|
||
- Valentin Gagarin (@fricklerhandwerk)
|
||
- Thomas Bereknyei (@tomberek)
|
||
- Robert Hensing (@roberth)
|
||
|
||
## Meeting protocol
|
||
|
||
The team meets twice a week:
|
||
|
||
- Discussion meeting: [Fridays 13:00-14:00 CET](https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?eid=MHNtOGVuNWtrZXNpZHR2bW1sM3QyN2ZjaGNfMjAyMjExMjVUMTIwMDAwWiBiOW81MmZvYnFqYWs4b3E4bGZraGczdDBxZ0Bn)
|
||
|
||
1. Triage issues and pull requests from the _No Status_ column (30 min)
|
||
2. Discuss issues and pull requests from the _To discuss_ column (30 min)
|
||
|
||
- Work meeting: [Mondays 13:00-15:00 CET](https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?eid=NTM1MG1wNGJnOGpmOTZhYms3bTB1bnY5cWxfMjAyMjExMjFUMTIwMDAwWiBiOW81MmZvYnFqYWs4b3E4bGZraGczdDBxZ0Bn)
|
||
|
||
1. Code review on pull requests from _In review_.
|
||
2. Other chores and tasks.
|
||
|
||
Meeting notes are collected on a [collaborative scratchpad](https://pad.lassul.us/Cv7FpYx-Ri-4VjUykQOLAw), and published on Discourse under the [Nix category](https://discourse.nixos.org/c/dev/nix/50).
|
||
|
||
## Project board protocol
|
||
|
||
The team uses a [GitHub project board](https://github.com/orgs/NixOS/projects/19/views/1) for tracking its work.
|
||
|
||
Issues on the board progress through the following states:
|
||
|
||
- No Status
|
||
|
||
During the discussion meeting, the team triages new items.
|
||
To be considered, issues and pull requests must have a high-level description to provide the whole team with the necessary context at a glance.
|
||
|
||
On every meeting, at least one item from each of the following categories is inspected:
|
||
|
||
1. [critical](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/labels/critical)
|
||
2. [security](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/labels/security)
|
||
3. [regression](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/labels/regression)
|
||
4. [bug](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues?q=is%3Aopen+label%3Abug+sort%3Areactions-%2B1-desc)
|
||
|
||
- [oldest pull requests](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+sort%3Acreated-asc)
|
||
- [most popular pull requests](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+sort%3Areactions-%2B1-desc)
|
||
- [oldest issues](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Acreated-asc)
|
||
- [most popular issues](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Areactions-%2B1-desc)
|
||
|
||
Team members can also add pull requests or issues they would like the whole team to consider.
|
||
|
||
If there is disagreement on the general idea behind an issue or pull request, it is moved to _To discuss_, otherwise to _In review_.
|
||
|
||
- To discuss
|
||
|
||
Pull requests and issues that are deemed important and controversial are discussed by the team during discussion meetings.
|
||
|
||
This may be where the merit of the change itself or the implementation strategy is contested by a team member.
|
||
|
||
As a general guideline, the order of items is determined as follows:
|
||
|
||
- Prioritise pull requests over issues
|
||
|
||
Contributors who took the time to implement concrete change proposals should not wait indefinitely.
|
||
|
||
- Prioritise fixing bugs over documentation, improvements or new features
|
||
|
||
The team values stability and accessibility higher than raw functionality.
|
||
|
||
- Interleave issues and PRs
|
||
|
||
This way issues without attempts at a solution get a chance to get addressed.
|
||
|
||
- In review
|
||
|
||
Pull requests in this column are reviewed together during work meetings.
|
||
This is both for spreading implementation knowledge and for establishing common values in code reviews.
|
||
|
||
When the overall direction is agreed upon, even when further changes are required, the pull request is assigned to one team member.
|
||
|
||
- Assigned for merging
|
||
|
||
One team member is assigned to each of these pull requests.
|
||
They will communicate with the authors, and make the final approval once all remaining issues are addressed.
|
||
|
||
If more substantive issues arise, the assignee can move the pull request back to _To discuss_ to involve the team again.
|
||
|
||
The process is illustrated in the following diagram:
|
||
|
||
```mermaid
|
||
flowchart TD
|
||
discuss[To discuss]
|
||
|
||
review[To review]
|
||
|
||
New --> |Disagreement on idea| discuss
|
||
New & discuss --> |Consensus on idea| review
|
||
|
||
review --> |Consensus on implementation| Assigned
|
||
|
||
Assigned --> |Implementation issues arise| review
|
||
Assigned --> |Remaining issues fixed| Merged
|
||
```
|