Op1st community governance for review
Hello friends and fellow FLOSS travelers: You are invited to review and provide your feedback, comments, ideas, and +1s for this proposed Operate First (Op1st) community governance, Governance 1.0: This links takes you to the instructions for commenting on the document directly in the pull request: https://github.com/operate-first/community/pull/107#issuecomment-989183317 That is the canonical location for discussion of this draft. However, in order to make this process more accessible, we have a mirrored copy of the draft as a Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19MJwXIEHTHyPfh9VpJwHtOjv1SR45IZ1aZRtQqUu... We will be carrying over or summarizing any comments, suggestions, changes, and so on from that document back into PR#107. If you have any questions for the Op1st community and are not already a member of our mailing list, with this link you can read the thread or join to comment via the web or email: https://lists.operate-first.cloud/archives/list/community@lists.operate-firs... If there are any public (here) or private questions I can answer or discussions you need, please let me know. Sometimes 1:1 discussions are needed to help move things forward, and it's my role to help. Kind regards, - Karsten -- 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
On 2021-12-09 00:03:33 -0800 (-0800), Karsten Wade wrote: [...]
Since the PR got approved without addressing my review comment[*] (and those of others) about this, I'll re-raise the discussion here instead. The approved text states: "We are using the upstream OpenInfra Foundation Code of Conduct until we can convene the new Community SIG to lead an open effort to create our own, modern code of conduct." The goal with the Open Infrastructure Foundation's Community Code of Conduct is that it be usable by all Open Infrastructure Projects, including the OpenInfra Labs project and any of its subprojects like Op1st. While Op1st having its own separate CoC is probably fine as long as it also follows the foundation's Community CoC, it may also be unnecessary duplication of effort and lead to confusion over things like legal reporting channels for violations. If you truly feel the existing CoC is not "modern" enough for Op1st (predicting in the governance document that a separate one will be required indicates there are known concerns with it on someone's part at least), then please collaborate with the rest of the Open Infrastructure community in order to help improve it rather than assuming it's carved in stone (it's not!). Great places to start that discussion would be on the foundation mailing list or at the next Diversity and Inclusion WG meeting. [*] https://github.com/operate-first/community/pull/107/files#r766205499 -- Jeremy Stanley
On 2021-12-17 17:33:48 +0000 (+0000), Jeremy Stanley wrote: [...]
Apologies for replying to myself, but discussion of these points has resumed in https://github.com/operate-first/community/pull/107 (post-approval). -- Jeremy Stanley
I'm the culprit for marking the PR as approved - sorry for the confusion. Luckily the PR still has Karstens 'do-not-merge' label. Once all conversations have been resolved or postponed, the label can be removed the PR will actually be merged. On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 2:45 PM Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> wrote:
participants (3)
-
Jeremy Stanley
-
Karsten Wade
-
Marcel Hild