[Community] Re: Governance for review

That is a great plan! A big +1 Thanks for all the work. I am super hyped too! On Thu 9. Dec 2021 at 08:12, Karsten Wade <kwade(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > To increase the accessibility of the review (so GitHub is not a barrier > for reviewers), I have this version in an Op1st GDrive: > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/19MJwXIEHTHyPfh9VpJwHtOjv1SR45IZ1aZRtQ... > > That is world readable, if you wish to comment in that doc you can > "Request edit access" in the document header. You can share that URL with > anyone, it is only our open discussion draft copied into a Google Doc. > > That document is not the canonical draft, so I will keep track of > discussions there and carry over quotes, summaries, and solutions to the > main pull request. > > Let me know if you have any questions or hit any stumbling blocks (i.e., > problems getting things working.) We are interested in having an open and > accessible discussion, let's make sure people know about this draft who > might care so they can have a chance to give input. > > You can also reach out with any private comments or questions, it's OK, > there is room for private deliberations in the pursuit of a healthy > community. > > Kind regards, > > - Karsten > On 12/8/21 16:20, Jeremy Eder wrote: > > Thanks! Commented, and shared around internally for more reviews. > > On Wed, Dec 8, 2021, 18:13 Karsten Wade <kwade(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> This email contains a link to the proposed governance, steps for how to >> comment, some further thoughts from me, and a proposed timeline for >> ratifying this governance. >> >> # Proposed governance >> I have drafted a first governance for the Op1st community, ready for >> reading and comments in this pull request: >> >> https://github.com/operate-first/community/pull/107 >> >> You can make comments directly in the "Files changed" view in GitHub, >> line by line. Every sentence within a paragraph has its own line, making it >> easier to comment directly. >> >> # How to comment >> Instructions for this are in this comment in the pull request: >> >> https://github.com/operate-first/community/pull/107#issuecomment-989183317 >> >> # Thoughts about the sections >> One section I forgot to include in the pull request is also in there as >> a comment from me, the one that initiates the Community SIG and the >> Operations SIG as the two starting community groups. >> >> One of the most important sections of governance for folks is the >> membership section. I think we need to plan for a membership scenario going >> forward based on where we are, and for us to essentially consider everyone >> as a member to start. >> >> So congrats, most of you are therefore members, and are encouraged to >> join one or both SIGs, once things are finished and ratified. >> >> # Timeline >> >> My proposal is we decide on this governance by consensus, the model for >> that is spelled out in the governance. >> >> Because we have no other way to decide things at this point, we are >> going to do the strange thing of adopting consensus as the model for this >> decision. This means, if you disagree you can try to convince all of us to >> use a different decision model. If you agree, you are free to +1 this >> section of my email. >> >> 08 Dec -- Proposed governance raised >> 15 Dec -- First call for consensus is made, giving a chance for any >> blockers (-1) to be raised >> 18 Dec -- If consensus is reached, governance is adopted. If there are >> blockers, we continue to work through them. >> 21 Dec -- If we still have blockers and have not reached consensus, then >> we hold over to January 2022. >> 11 Jan -- Second call for consensus is made, regardless of open >> blockers. Call for consensus at this point includes if the community is >> going to proceed regardless of blockers, or for us to identify which >> blockers we want to resolve. >> Weekly until closed -- We move through the blockers or decide every week >> by consensus to no longer try to work through a blocker. >> >> Ultimately, anyone making a block is saying they are willing to leave if >> they don't feel their blocker is resolved. So each of these consensus >> points is a chance for the community to say if we want to continue working >> this out or if we have reached consensus without the blocking person >> included. >> >> -- >> Karsten Wade [he/him/his] | Senior Community Architect | @quaid >> Red Hat Open Source Program Office (OSPO) : @redhatopen >> The Open Source Way : https://theopensourceway.org >> Operate First : https://operate-first.cloud >> _______________________________________________ >> Community mailing list -- community(a)lists.operate-first.cloud >> To unsubscribe send an email to >> community-leave(a)lists.operate-first.cloud >> > -- > -- > Karsten Wade [he/him/his] | Senior Community Architect | @quaid > Red Hat Open Source Program Office (OSPO) : @redhatopen > The Open Source Way : https://theopensourceway.org > Operate First : https://operate-first.cloud > > _______________________________________________ > Community mailing list -- community(a)lists.operate-first.cloud > To unsubscribe send an email to community-leave(a)lists.operate-first.cloud > -- Thorsten Schwesig [he/him/his] Operate First : https://operate-first.cloud The Open Source Way : https://theopensourceway.org The Kant Way: "Always act according to that maxim whose universality as a law you can at the same time will" https://w.wiki/33w7 _______________________________________________ Community mailing list -- community(a)lists.operate-first.cloud To unsubscribe send an email to community-leave(a)lists.operate-first.cloud