147 lines
6.7 KiB
Markdown
147 lines
6.7 KiB
Markdown
# Nix maintainers team
|
||
|
||
## Motivation
|
||
|
||
The team's main responsibility is to set a direction for the development of Nix and ensure that the code is in good shape.
|
||
|
||
We aim to achieve this by improving the contributor experience and attracting more maintainers – that is, by helping other people contributing to Nix and eventually taking responsibility – in order to scale the development process to match users' needs.
|
||
|
||
### 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
|
||
|
||
- Establish, communicate, and maintain a technical roadmap
|
||
- Improve documentation targeted at contributors
|
||
- Record architecture and design decisions
|
||
- Elaborate contribution guides and abide to them
|
||
- Define and assert quality criteria for contributions
|
||
- Maintain the issue tracker and triage pull requests
|
||
- Help contributors succeed with pull requests that address roadmap milestones
|
||
- Manage the release lifecycle
|
||
- Regularly publish reports on work done
|
||
- Engage with third parties in the interest of the project
|
||
- 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)
|
||
- John Ericson (@Ericson2314)
|
||
|
||
## 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](#no-status) column (30 min)
|
||
2. Discuss issues and pull requests from the [To discuss](#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](#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.
|
||
|
||
Items 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)
|
||
5. [tests of existing functionality](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues?q=is%3Aopen+label%3Atests+-label%3Afeature+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.
|
||
To ensure process quality and reliability, all non-trivial pull requests must be triaged before merging.
|
||
|
||
If there is disagreement on the general idea behind an issue or pull request, it is moved to [To discuss](#to-discuss).
|
||
Otherwise, the issue or pull request in questions get the label [`idea approved`](https://github.com/NixOS/nix/labels/idea%20approved).
|
||
For issues this means that an implementation is welcome and will be prioritised for review.
|
||
For pull requests this means that:
|
||
- Unfinished work is encouraged to be continued.
|
||
- A reviewer is assigned to take responsibility for getting the pull request merged.
|
||
The item is moved to the [Assigned](#assigned) column.
|
||
- If needed, the team can decide to do a collarorative review.
|
||
Then the item is moved to the [In review](#in-review) column, and review session is scheduled.
|
||
|
||
What constitutes a trivial pull request is up to maintainers' judgement.
|
||
|
||
### 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 and testing 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.
|
||
If significant changes are requested or reviewers cannot come to a conclusion in reasonable time, the pull request is [marked as draft](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/proposing-changes-to-your-work-with-pull-requests/changing-the-stage-of-a-pull-request#converting-a-pull-request-to-a-draft).
|
||
|
||
### Assigned
|
||
|
||
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-discuss) or [In review](#in-review) to involve the team again.
|
||
|
||
### Flowchart
|
||
|
||
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
|
||
```
|