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

Add working group state per Project Lifecycle. #1880

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Add working group state per Project Lifecycle. #1880

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

mikeal
Copy link
Contributor

@mikeal mikeal commented Jun 3, 2015

This adds the Working Group states I outlined in the Project Lifecycle and WG-Merger documents for the project merger.

The biggest consequence of these states is that the "Core" WGs are entitled to elect a TSC seat.

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

Not a criticism, just an observation, but the labels seems a little arbitrary.

For example, the tracing WG gets designated 'core' although it hasn't really delivered anything yet (I say that as a member of that WG) whereas nan is labeled 'mature' even though it's an (indirect) dependency of a huge part of the npm ecosystem. I'd say nan is much more core than tracing is so what gives?

@mikeal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikeal commented Jun 3, 2015

The labels were based on the maturity of those groups when I wrote the initial merger document. At the time the tracing work was quite active and the native addons group hadn't even met yet. We can go back and re-define the maturity levels based on current activity.

@Qard
Copy link
Member

Qard commented Jun 3, 2015

Indeed, tracing is definitely not core. It's too experimental, and we don't yet have a solid direction. I'd probably put it in incubation; maybe mature, as async-wrap improves.

@mikeal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikeal commented Jun 3, 2015

@Qard it wouldn't be incubating, it's definitely "mature" in that it has a scope, is chartered, and is meeting regularly.

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

Any progress on this?

@mikeal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikeal commented Aug 21, 2015

Closing this. We're working on re-doing the project lifecycle document.

@mikeal mikeal closed this Aug 21, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants