-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 133
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
Moderation access #469
Moderation access #469
Conversation
03741cb
to
ba2bda8
Compare
Can you please run this (and all doc contributions) through a spelling/grammar checker? |
One note is that we are still moving some repos over to nodejs-private, and we should probably wait until that is done to land this (if we reach consensus). I don't think that moving them over should take more than a few days. |
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
* Limiting access to reduce risk | ||
* Enabling individuals to move community work forward without undue delay | ||
|
||
When possible we should use automation and tools to reduce the breadth of access |
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.
add comma after possible
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.
Probably don't want to use we
here or on line 27.
@Trott do you have a good suggestion for one that you use when generating md files ? |
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
* Enabling individuals to move community work forward without undue delay | ||
|
||
When possible we should use automation and tools to reduce the breadth of access | ||
that needs to be provide in order to enable individuals to move community work foward. |
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: be provide
-> be provided
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.
forward
is misspelled
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
As these tools are developed and put in place we will reduce the groups to which | ||
org ownership is granted. | ||
|
||
At the current time the following groups are granted access in order for them |
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.
add a comma after time
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
to facilitate community work. | ||
|
||
* TSC members | ||
* Chair of the Community Comittee |
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.
Committee
is misspelled
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
* TSC members | ||
* Chair of the Community Comittee | ||
* Moderation team members. - It is expected that moderation team members will limit | ||
their use of the access granted to that requied to carry out moderation across the |
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.
required
is misspelled
I usually use the free version of Grammarly, although I don't know how well it does with raw markdown. I have a Markdown editor, so I copy/paste the rendered doc into Grammarly rather than the raw markdown. But I'd guess it's fine, especially for a doc like this. It can generate a lot of false positives, but I think that's pretty much true of all the grammar tools. |
eb4558d
to
daaa07f
Compare
Pushed commit addressing initial comments. |
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
TSC members and the Chair of the Community Committee are the only individuals granted | ||
Owner permissions within the Node.js GitHub Organization. | ||
As with other resources within the community, Org ownership will be | ||
granted in order to optimize for the conflicting requirements of: |
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.
We don't use "Org ownership" in the doc. That phrase is pretty colloquial. Stick to the terminology elsewhere: Owner permissions.
"As with other resources within the community..." is filler. Take it out.
So, all told, maybe something like this?:
Whether to grant Owner permissions is determined by optimizing for the following conflicting requirements:
(As an alternative, I'd also be all for taking out all of this explanatory material and just identifying the people that have Owner permissions.)
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
|
||
When possible, automation and tools should be used to reduce the breadth of | ||
access that needs to be provided in order to enable individuals to move | ||
community work forward. As these tools are developed and put in place we will |
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.
How about this instead?:
As these tools are created, the groups to which Owner permissions are granted will be reduced.
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
community work forward. As these tools are developed and put in place we will | ||
reduce the groups to which org ownership is granted. | ||
|
||
At the current time, the following groups are granted access in order for them |
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.
Nit: "At the current time" is superfluous. Take it out.
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.
Also consider removing "in order for them to facilitate community work.". The sentence should end with a colon as well. So all told, maybe this?:
The following groups are granted Ownership permissions:
GitHub-Org-Management-Policy.md
Outdated
|
||
* TSC members | ||
* Chair of the Community Committee | ||
* Moderation team members. - It is expected that moderation team members |
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.
Nit: remove the dash/hyphen/whatever.
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.
Nit: Get rid of "It is expected that".
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.
Generally, I think we've been styling it captialized in the docs: Moderation Team
The TL;DR of this seems to be "Moderation Team gets Owner permissions until there's some other way for them to do their work, which will hopefully be a bot at some point in the not-too-distant future." +1 from me! |
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.
LGTM
Given the objections that @rvagg has raised on this, I'd like for this to to on the tsc-agenda for discussion before it lands. I'm not -1'ing the actual change, I just want it to be discussed on the call. |
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.
Temporarily -1'ing to ensure that there is adequate discussion on the tsc call before this lands
Was discussed in last TSC meeting, no objections to moving forward. James said we could dismiss his objection. |
James agreed we could dismiss in last TSC review.
Also from the TSC meeting: Everyone with owner access needs to have 2FA enabled on their github account. That needs to be confirmed before assigning the owner permission. Also, efforts to pursue automation options need to move forward so that assigning owner permissions to individuals outside the TSC and CommComm chairs no longer becomes necessary. The rationale there is strictly limited to general security concerns -- that is, the higher the number of users with owner permissions, the higher the risk of something bad happening should one of those accounts be compromised. So granting owner permissions to the moderation team should be considered a temporary action until an automated solution can be developed. |
@Trott took the action to validate 2FA before adding owner access. |
Yep... for existing mod team members... it needs to be confirmed for new members before assigning permissions. |
PR-URL: #469 Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: MichaëZasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com>
Landed as 9cf274c |
No description provided.