Skip to content
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

CONTRIBUTING.md does not include explicit guidance on when an issue can be closed #136

Open
Kevsy opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #137
Open

CONTRIBUTING.md does not include explicit guidance on when an issue can be closed #136

Kevsy opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #137
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@Kevsy
Copy link
Contributor

Kevsy commented May 16, 2024

Problem description
CONTRIBUTING.md#working-on-issues does not include explicit guidance regarding when an issue can be closed.

Expected action
Update the working on issues section to include:

  • reference to ProjectCharter and use of lazy consensus
  • that a participant may object to closure of an issue if they believe consensus was not reached, and reopen the issue
  • that the issue may be closed by the original author or by a maintainer in the sub-project
  • that maintainers may not close their own issues without reference to consensus achieved
  • 'consensus achieved' can also include that the issue is agreed (by lazy consensus) to be stale
  • closing an issue should include a comment on how it was resolved / or reference to consensus that it can not be resolved.
@Kevsy Kevsy added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label May 16, 2024
Kevsy added a commit to Kevsy/rep_main that referenced this issue May 16, 2024
@Kevsy Kevsy linked a pull request May 16, 2024 that will close this issue
@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator

hdamker commented May 16, 2024

@Kevsy see my comments on the PR - my view is that we shouldn't do it:

  • the contributing document should give guidelines for contributors into the code base, it is not about decision making about issues (decision making is defined in the ProjectCharter)
  • the guidance is from my perspective too formal and will not fit to all kind of issue which can come up, including technical decisions/scope change proposals/non-technical discussions/spam/...
  • some of the points don't make sense to me, e.g. why can't a Maintainer close (withdraw) an own issue if they see that there is no consensus achievable on the issue?

@Kevsy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Kevsy commented May 17, 2024

Hi @hdamker

the contributing document should give guidelines for contributors into the code base, it is not about decision making about issues (decision making is defined in the ProjectCharter)

Fair point. I can remove this PR and make one for ProjectCharter

the guidance is from my perspective too formal and will not fit to all kind of issue which can come up, including technical decisions/scope change proposals/non-technical discussions/spam/...

I/we can expand the list - but I'm not sure what you mean by 'too formal'? The intention is to remove ambiguity.

some of the points don't make sense to me, e.g. why can't a Maintainer close (withdraw) an own issue if they see that there is no consensus achievable on the issue?

A Maintainer can close their own issue if they see that there is no consensus, but the point in the list says "that maintainers may not close their own issues without reference to consensus achieved". Which can be a pointer to minutes or other lazy consensus that the sub-project agree with that position.

some of the points don't make sense to me,

Other than the item above, any others..? I believe we should cover this topic in ProjectCharter to avoid the situation where issues are being closed without consensus achieved.

@Kevsy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Kevsy commented May 17, 2024

PS this is likely to be a concern in other (non-CAMARA) projects too, so e.g. Linux Foundation may have a. recommendation

@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator

hdamker commented May 17, 2024

@Kevsy agree that LF might have something. But just to note that the decision part within the ProjectCharter is based on a proposal from LF.

@wrathwolf @eharrison24 Do you have examples of LF projects who described the types of decisions and how to handle them in more detail then we have currently in the Project Charter? I suppose that closing issues is just one of these decisions, there are other which might be more important, like a PR merge.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants