This sounds really interesting Ben - I'm definitely +1 to the idea.
The only question that comes up in my mind is, are files/areas of the code base segmented enough at the moment for this to be useful? -- Tom Arnfeld Developer // DueDil (+44) 7525940046 25 Christopher Street, London, EC2A 2BS On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Benjamin Mahler <benjamin.mah...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > I have been chatting with a few committers and we'd like to consider adding > the concept of MAINTAINERS files to coincide with our "shepherds" concept, > introduced here: > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mesos-dev/201404.mbox/%3ccafeoqnwjibkayurkf0mfxve2usd5d91xpoe8u+pktiyvszv...@mail.gmail.com%3E > Please take a moment to read that thread and its responses here in which > maintainers are alluded to: > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mesos-dev/201404.mbox/%3cca+a2mtvc61-3idxtm-ghgcxekqxwz063ouhpbrgbpvsa9zs...@mail.gmail.com%3E > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mesos-dev/201404.mbox/%3CCAAkWvAxegdg8+QQ4-sqZ-SKi9J=2WJDCVg_Sc9aaHttS4=6...@mail.gmail.com%3E > *Motivation:* > To re-iterate from that thread, many companies rely on Mesos as the > foundational layer of their software infrastructure stack. Much of the > success of Mesos can be attributed to our focus on quality (code that is > simple / easy to read and understand, high attention to detail, thorough > reviewing, good testing practices, managing technical debt, learning from > each other, etc). > As the community of contributors has grown, it's become increasingly > difficult to ensure that people are able to find reviewers with experience > in specific areas of the project. Good contributions often fall through the > cracks as a result of the lack of clarity around this. > We would like to ensure that reviewers with context and a long-term outlook > on the particular area of the code are involved in providing feedback. It > can be difficult for a contributor to consider the implications of their > change, when they are looking to get a bug fixed or a feature implemented > before the next release or the end of a sprint. > We'd like to be able to add more and more committers as the community > grows, and incentivize them to become responsible maintainers of components > as they become more involved in the project. > *MAINTAINERS file system:* > In order to ensure we can maintain the quality of the code as we grow, we'd > like to propose adding an MAINTAINERS file system to the source tree. > From the chromium mailing list (s/OWNERS/MAINTAINERS/): > *"A MAINTAINERS file lives in a directory and describes (in simple list > form) whose review is required to commit changes to it. MAINTAINERShip > inherits, in that someone listed at a higher level in the tree is capable > of reviewing changes to lower level files.* > *MAINTAINERS files provide a means for people to find engineers experienced > in developing specific areas for code reviews. They are designed to help > ensure changes don't fall through the cracks and get appropriate scrutiny. > MAINTAINERShip is a responsibility and people designated as MAINTAINERS in > a given area are responsible for the long term improvement of that area, > and reviewing code in that area."* > This would be enforced via our review tooling (post-reviews.py / reviewbot, > apply-review.py), and a git commit hook if possible. > There would be a process for becoming a maintainer, the details of which we > will clarify in a follow up. I’m thinking it will require an existing > maintainer proposing a candidate to become a maintainer based on merit. > Merit is not about quantity of work, it means doing things the community > values in a way that the community values. > As part of this, we would be documenting qualities we look for in > committers and maintainers. > *Feedback:* > The goal with this is to be even more inclusive than we are today while > maintaining the quality of our code and design decisions. > I'm a +1 for this approach, and I would like to hear from others. What do > you like about this? What are potential concerns? Much of this was thought > about in terms of how to further the following of the Apache Way for Mesos, > any concerns there? Take your time to mull this over, your feedback would > be much appreciated. > If this does sound good to everyone at a high level, I will follow up with > further discussion to formalize this, and I’ll work to document and > implement it. > Ben
