-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 270
Add policy for adding new maintainers #434
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
Changes from all commits
06ef60d
d9870a7
fa8b2a6
b317fbe
c72c8ac
6d96fda
1ec5556
a2be0d5
25a7ac5
ce15fc1
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ | ||
| # Adding New Maintainers | ||
|
|
||
| This document defines the process for adding new Maintainers to Space Station 14. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Requirements | ||
|
|
||
| Maintainers represent Space Wizards as staff. Certain requirements must be met before a person can become a Maintainer: | ||
| - A vote must be held according to the Voting Process outlined below. | ||
| - Be a member of the Space Station 14 Discord server. | ||
| - If the nominee has caused Administration issues in the past, these issues must be raised and discussed during the voting process. Administration issues include, but are not limited to, being banned from the game, banned from the Discord server, or having a history of being rude to other members of the community. | ||
| - Have a good understanding of the Space Station 14 codebase and how it works. This must be raised and discussed during the voting process. | ||
| - Have a solid understanding of the culture and values of the game and community | ||
|
|
||
| ### Voting Process | ||
|
|
||
| To add a new Maintainer, a current Maintainer has to nominate the candidate. Once a person has been nominated, the following process should be followed: | ||
| 1. A vote will be created in the "Internal" category on the Space Station 14 Discourse, using the appropriate template. This vote will be open for one week, and all Maintainers will be notified of the vote. | ||
| 2. During this time, Maintainers should discuss the nomination, raise concerns, and ask any questions they may have. | ||
| - If there is a unanimous vote in favor or against the nomination by the end of day 2 of the vote, it may be closed early. | ||
| - If this happens, the Lead Maintainer Team will review the vote and decide if it should be closed or remain open for the full week. | ||
| - If there is no clear majority, the vote must remain open for the full week. | ||
| - Concerns about a nominated person must be addressed before the vote may close. This will delay the vote until the concerns are resolved. | ||
| - For a vote to pass, it must have a supermajority (66%) of votes in favor. | ||
| - Abstain votes are considered neutral. Only votes in favor or against are counted. | ||
| 3. Once the vote is closed, the results will be announced. If the vote passes, the person being nominated will be contacted by a Lead Maintainer and asked if they would like to accept the position. If they agree, they may then be added to the Maintainers list. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Special Maintainer Roles | ||
|
|
||
| Some roles are special Maintainer roles and follow a different process to the normal Maintainer role. These roles are as follows: | ||
| - **Head Mapper**: A Maintainer responsible for ensuring mapping standards and approving and merging mapping PRs. | ||
| - **Art lead**: A Maintainer responsible for ensuring a consistent art style and approving sprite PRs. | ||
| - **Robust Toolbox Maintainer**: A Maintainer of Robust Toolbox, our underlying game engine. | ||
|
|
||
|
Comment on lines
+32
to
+33
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd probably remove this as I think RT maintainers would entirely be under PJB's purview unless that were no longer feasible, in which case we would add them under the policy.
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Mirroring the response from Discourse:
|
||
| #### Starting a Vote for a Special Role | ||
|
|
||
| The process for adding a special Maintainer is the same as for a normal Maintainer, but with the following alterations: | ||
| - Only a member that is already a part of the special role can nominate a new member for that role. | ||
| - When the role is empty, any maintainer can nominate a new member. | ||
| - Lead Maintainers can nominate a new member for the role, even if they are not a part of that role. | ||
| - The template used will be the "Special Maintainer Vote" template. | ||
| - This template has two votes that run concurrently: | ||
| - One for members of the special role to vote on. | ||
| - One for all Maintainer to vote on. | ||
| - Both votes must pass for the nomination to be accepted. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this bullet points explaining the additional maintainer roles are unnecessary. You could remove all of this below and replace it with something like this:
For adding maintainers with special duties (engine maintainers, art leads, etc.), the process for voting is the same as above but with the following changes:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's good if it's well defined. Saying "etc." leaves it open to interpretation.