code-of-conduct.md: link to CNCF code of conduct and add contact info #11
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/invalid-owners-file
|
couple of questions:
|
|
@jberkhahn "community chair" is a governance designation, while "subproject owner" is a project-specific role. The election process for each is different. I assume you mean a Github team construct. Is that typical for reviewers? If so, then probably. |
|
Yeah, I meant a Github team. Is the co-chair position you, Ken Sipe, and myself do getting folded into the community chair position, the subproject owner position, or is it remaining it's own thing? If so, it should be documented somewhere. |
|
@jberkhahn community co-chairs should be documented somewhere, and probably have an owners alias. Will add this as a follow up to #13 |
|
/lgtm |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
estroz
changed the title
estroz
force-pushed
the
chore/code-of-conduct
branch
from
69779a6 to
824c43a
Compare
|
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
openshift-ci-robot
removed
the
needs-rebase
|
The following users are mentioned in OWNERS file(s) but are not members of the operator-framework org. Once all users have been added as members of the org, you can trigger verification by writing
|
estroz
force-pushed
the
chore/code-of-conduct
branch
from
824c43a to
cc435de
Compare
| * Figure out how to keep and then keep a record of CoC reports and outcomes for precedent _This is something we are still actively discussing on how to do and is not fully hardened._ | ||
|
|
||
| ## Formation of the Code of Conduct Committee (CoCC): | ||
| * The CoCC consists of 5 members. In the first election, the top 3 voted people will be appointed 2 year terms and the other 2 members will be appointed for a 1 year term. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two years seems like a long time. Perhaps everyone gets a 1 year term but every year only half of the folks are up for re-election. So after you get the initial 5 members, 3 of the folks up for election next year and then the other two up for election the year after that. That way you always have the opportunity for new folks on the committee but you also have continuity since not everyone is up for election at the same time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your wording is confusing.
not everyone is up for election at the same time.
You can't stagger election years if everyone has a 1 year term. Are you suggesting that everyone has a 1 year term, then at the end of that year 3 members can be re-elected but 2 people cannot until the following year?
| * The members of the Code of Conduct Committee (CoCC) will be public so the people who report CoC issues know exactly who they are working with. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Upon appointment, the CoCC will: | ||
| * Review the current Code of Conduct and propose revisions or addendums if necessary. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the process for approving revisions or addendums? Majority vote? Two thirds vote?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From charter.md:
Meetings are considered at quorum when a simple majority of the members are
present. Where there are 4 or fewer members available due vacant seats or
recusal, quorum is 2.
|
The following users are mentioned in OWNERS file(s) but are untrusted for the following reasons. One way to make the user trusted is to add them as members of the operator-framework org. You can then trigger verification by writing
|
estroz
force-pushed
the
chore/code-of-conduct
branch
from
e9f0141 to
07c2f48
Compare
estroz
force-pushed
the
chore/code-of-conduct
branch
from
07c2f48 to
b250281
Compare
estroz
force-pushed
the
chore/code-of-conduct
branch
from
b250281 to
6d398c9
Compare
|
On further thought, having a committee for operator-framework may be superfluous since the CNCF already has a mediator. If we find we need a full CoC committee, we can revisit the documents previously proposed here. |
estroz
changed the title
6 participants
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.