Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Document change review process - #132
Conversation
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
mnm678
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A couple of minor comments, but this looks great.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
joshuagl
commented
Nov 24, 2020
I think we're all agreed on this, but in the spirit of the proposed changes I'd appreciate a second approval. |
trishankatdatadog
commented
Nov 24, 2020
We should change the branch protection rules to require >= 2 reviews... |
lukpueh
commented
Nov 25, 2020
Done. |
f271b4807b2b9e to
f271b48CompareDocument the consensus builder and all active TAP Editors. Signed-off-by: Joshua Lock <jlock@vmware.com>
Define the roles of participants in the project and document the expected change review process for the specification. Signed-off-by: Joshua Lock <jlock@vmware.com>
What constitutes a business day may vary by region. Weeks are more universal. Signed-off-by: Joshua Lock <jlock@vmware.com>
Signed-off-by: Joshua Lock <jlock@vmware.com>
f271b48 to
3799328Comparejoshuagl
commented
Nov 25, 2020
Apologies, I forced push to squash in some of the fixup commits introduced during code review and that has dismissed the existing reviews. Will need re-approval to meet the branch protection rules. Thank you in advance. |
mnm678
commented
Nov 25, 2020
hmm, the Travis version checks are failing. This doesn't change the specification itself, so I'm going to go ahead and merge. |
In-line with what is discussed in #130 here's a first stab at documenting our change review process. I don't know whether 5 business days is long enough a contemplation period, or whether the term "business days" is clear enough. I'd very much welcome feedback on those aspects, as well as the rest of the proposal.
In order to ensure it's clear who will be doing the review, I've also added a
MAINTAINERS.mdlisting the consensus builder and active TAP editors. Hopefully we can link to this document from TAP 1 so that it's clear to participants in the TAP process who the TAP Editors are.Significant inspiration was taken from SPIFFE's GOVERNANCE.md