forked from lix-project/lix
a4af966d5d
write down the process we have been developing and following so far. Co-Authored-By: Théophane Hufschmitt <theophane.hufschmitt@tweag.io> Co-Authored-By: John Ericson <John.Ericson@Obsidian.Systems>
80 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
80 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
# Nix maintainers team
|
||
|
||
## Motivation
|
||
|
||
The goal of the team to help other people to contribute to Nix.
|
||
|
||
## 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 12:00-13:00 UTC](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 12:00-14:00 UTC](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
|
||
|
||
Team members can add pull requests or issues to discuss or review together.
|
||
|
||
During the discussion meeting, the team triages new items.
|
||
If there is disagreement on the general idea behind the issue or pull request, items are moved to _To discuss_, otherwise to _In review_.
|
||
|
||
- To discuss
|
||
|
||
Pull requests and issues that are important and controverisal enough to warrant a discussion by the whole team.
|
||
|
||
This may be where the merit of the change itself or the implementation strategy is contested by a team member.
|
||
|
||
- 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
|
||
```
|