Skip to content
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

Maintainership #400

Closed
xeruf opened this issue Sep 16, 2022 · 13 comments
Closed

Maintainership #400

xeruf opened this issue Sep 16, 2022 · 13 comments

Comments

@xeruf
Copy link
Collaborator

xeruf commented Sep 16, 2022

As @bastibe seems to have been busy/away for a few months now and there are quite a few bugs and PRs, I would like to ask how to move on here.
Would you be open to adding co-maintainers to the repo?
Should we move to an organization such as https://github.com/emacsorphanage or https://github.com/toemacs ?
CC @tarsius @purcell

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Sep 20, 2022

I would absolutely be open to adding maintainers. Life is indeed very busy at the moment and leaves little room for active maintenance on this project.

I would prefer a simple co-maintainer on this repo instead of moving the repo to another organization entirely.

@xeruf
Copy link
Collaborator Author

xeruf commented Sep 25, 2022

So I would consider @dppdppd @jmay and myself due to recent contributions :)
@dalanicolai also has two PRs up, idk if he might still be interested in joining again

@jmay
Copy link
Collaborator

jmay commented Sep 26, 2022

Happy to help out in any way I can, I do have some time available. But my single contribution to the code was pretty minimal.

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Sep 26, 2022

Gladly! I'll grant commit rights to @jmay and @xeruf, and to @dppdppd as well if they so desire.

Since I've been in a situation like this before, it is a good idea at this time to think about how we'd like to collaborate.

I think it's generally a good idea to never commit to master, and to only merge pull requests if at least a second person has accepted it (barring time-critical bug fixes etc.). I also think it's a generally good idea to not have too many fixed rules to follow and keep things informal and personal 😁.

What do you think?

@xeruf
Copy link
Collaborator Author

xeruf commented Sep 26, 2022

Yes, totally agree, if there are more than two maintainers this is not a problem.
I do think it is sensible to enable branch protection on master, preventing force pushes and requiring a PR review, all this can be added in the settings.

I guess we all will only contribute sporadically, but the point is that we do not have a single point of failure anymore :)

I have written https://kull.jfischer.org, maybe you find that useful :)

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Sep 26, 2022

Personally, I prefer social conventions over technological restrictions. As such, I am not generally a fan of git hooks or protected branches to enforce policy. I've found it more of a hindrance than a useful protection for professionals (although it is a good safety net for novice contributors).

Regardless, if you'd prefer a more rigid workflow, I won't stand in the way.

@xeruf
Copy link
Collaborator Author

xeruf commented Sep 26, 2022

that's fine with me - so are we already free to merge in reviewed code or would you like to still have a say there?

@jmay
Copy link
Collaborator

jmay commented Sep 26, 2022

Agree with @bastibe. Until I know the codebase really well, I would not merge anything without discussion, but I don't like to set up elaborate control structures & systems before they are needed.

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Sep 27, 2022

Feel free to merge as you see fit! Of course you can always ping me if you'd like my input.

Most important of all, however, please do not feel pressured to "work" on org-journal. We're doing this for fun, and there is absolutely no obligation to respond to things quickly or at all. I've had my brush with burnout, and it's not worth it for anybody. When in doubt, it is perfectly acceptable to tell people to fix things on their own. Github is a platform for friendly collaboration, not work allocation.

@jmay
Copy link
Collaborator

jmay commented Dec 9, 2022

@bastibe I'm happy to test & merge the most recent few PRs, but I don't have permissions yet.

@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Dec 9, 2022

@jmay, Github listed you as "invite expired". I've sent you another one.

@casch-at
Copy link
Collaborator

I had and still have to resolve personal things, but I think I`m fit enough to contribute again. A big thanks to all the contributor for helping to improve org-journal. @bastibe also reached out around 2021 in person, but at that time a wasn't fit enough to continue, sorry for not being honest -- Does that mean I have passed the "I'm not a robot" test?

I think it's generally a good idea to never commit to master, and to only merge pull requests if at least a second person has accepted it (barring time-critical bug fixes etc.). I also think it's a generally good idea to not have too many fixed rules to follow and keep things informal and personal 😁.

The CI is running again 👍🏽 So no commits at all from now on to master "(barring time-critical bug fixes etc.)" etc. loophole :-D

What about time constraints? What if nobody is answering for N days?

@casch-at casch-at pinned this issue Feb 18, 2024
@bastibe
Copy link
Owner

bastibe commented Feb 19, 2024

I'm glad to hear that you're feeling better, and I'm glad to have you back in action!

Nevertheless, always remember that we're doing all of this for fun only! Our personal health and wellbeing are way more important than this here project. Stay safe everybody.

@casch-at casch-at changed the title Maintainership org-journal forum -- use responsibly Feb 19, 2024
@casch-at casch-at unpinned this issue Feb 20, 2024
@casch-at casch-at changed the title org-journal forum -- use responsibly Maintainership Feb 20, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants