-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 233
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
PROCESS CHANGE: WG leads should be in CNCF's maintainers.csv #1383
Comments
cc @knative/steering-committee |
Some notes:
Also, @csantanapr , it was mentioned that you might have an objection for this. Any comments? |
Update, in SC meeting, we had a vote and agreement for having WG leads in maintainers.csv file as well: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Rpd2nhmLWrkFJUfpJ31Ox2PpultJ-bYIhqaiWQff_I/edit#bookmark=id.8jsaovwwr9fw Not all approvers, but WG leads (in addition to SC+TOC members) Updating the ticket description above. |
During #945 I see TOC and SC members are added to the list in https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/main/project-maintainers.csv.
However, we should have more people there.
For example, Istio has different groups (https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/main/project-maintainers.csv#L1179):
We can go with the same structure.
Expected benefits
Expected costs
UPDATE: see this comment: #1383 (comment) . We'll add WG leads and not all approvers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: