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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

TSC Chair definition and election procedure #5071

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

TSC Chair definition and election procedure #5071

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 9 additions & 0 deletions GOVERNANCE.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -25,6 +25,15 @@ StackStorm uses a three-tiered system of Maintainer roles:
* Have good experience with the StackStorm codebase, expected to provide significant value to the project, helping it grow, improve and succeed.
* Have full member write access to [StackStorm](https://github.com/stackstorm/) and [StackStorm-Exchange](https://github.com/stackstorm-exchange) Github organizations, CI/CD, Moderator at [forum](https://forum.stackstorm.com/), [Slack](https://stackstorm.com/community-signup) and other Community platforms.
* Receive **one vote** in the voting process.
* [Chair](OWNERS.md#chair-)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As we’re moving to the other leadership model (from many to one), let’s please replace the current Leaders role group with the TSC Chair role.

Quick context is that Leaders were originally created to fit several people in the position of leadership. With the new chairperson role, this model becomes obsolete and needs a change.

Otherwise E_TOO_MANY_ROLES in the Governance, 5!

Copy link
Member

@punkrokk punkrokk Nov 3, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@armab I don't think the spirit of this role is actually to replace the Leaders role. My understanding is it is a role for someone to volunteer and be elected to run the TSC meetings on behalf of the TSC group as a whole. While some of the Leaders responsibilities may be delegated to this role, it's not my understanding that it would replace Dmitri as Leader of the project. cc @StackStorm/tsc

Maybe the the role of Secretary would better communicate this. I would imagine this Secretary fills more of a position than a role.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this mean that the chair gets the 3 votes that were normally given to the Leadership role?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I originally though we still had the leadership role, but the chair was a responsibility that we'd alter every n months. Keeping the leadership role would keep continuity.
So I like @punkrokk difference between position/role, but prefer the position to be named chair than secretary, as I think it is more than what you'd associate with a secretary position.

Copy link
Member

@arm4b arm4b Nov 3, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've attended KubeCon/CloudNativeCon and 2 OpenSource Summits this year which are all about the LF and CNCF projects

I would say that TSC Chair is pretty much a Leadership role for the project, apart of just running the meetings.
It's literally head of the TSC. During the nomination phase TSC Chair normally provides his "statement of intent" describing the project vision, plans, etc. And so why Election is important.

Now look at the Maintainer Roles:

Leaders
    Head of Technical Steering Committee (TSC).
    Responsible for Project Strategy

When Governance was drafted, initially we decided instead of adding 1 TSC Chair to add many Leaders that would be responsible for all this. We defined many Leader(s) to make sure it fits @dzimine and @LindsayHill. Now if we add one TSC Chair, it naturally should replace the Leaders per original idea and consistency.

So or define one TSC Chair or keep many TSC Leaders as is.

Copy link
Member

@arm4b arm4b Nov 3, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Here are more questions:

  • If we want to keep the Leaders, can the TSC Chair be also part of the Leaders group?
    • If not, why?
    • If yes, isn't it confusing for 1 person to be part of 2 groups/roles/positions/whatever? Why complicating?
  • If TSC Chair is an overall a Leadership role, is he automatically a member of the Leaders too?
    • If not, why?
    • If yes, why another chair role needed? (see below)
  • If we add the TSC Chair just as a meeting runner (which I believe is not what Project Chairperson is), why this couldn't be distributed between the TSC Leaders in a more simple manner?

What the existing Governance tells:

  • Leaders
    • [...]
    • Responsible for Project Strategy, External Relations, Organizational aspects, coordinating Events, Partnerships.

Based on that, Isn't a TSC Meeting an Organizational aspect and Coordination Event?
TSC Chair is normally responsible for External Relations as well. This is what LF recommends. Do you recognize now these signs that Leaders were created to reflect the TSC chairperson responsibilities?

^^ Having said that, to keep the Governance consistent, this needs more work around re-defining roles. Otherwise we'll have more confusion rather than clarity with 5 different roles.


The char is designated from TSC members every 6 months. The Chair responsibilities are:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

typo:

The char is designated
should be
The chair is designated

* maintaining project policies and procedures
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
* maintaining project policies and procedures
* Representing the TSC and the technical community within and outside of StackStorm.
* Maintaining project policies and procedures.

this, for example, includes communication with the Linux Foundation which is one of the TSC chair responsibilities and recommended by the LF.

* setting agenda, chairing TSC meetings and keeping their records
* capturing and tracking agreed actions
* tracking project plans, ensure their currency and facilitating execution

Election procedure: any TSC member can be nominated or self-nominate to the Chair role. The term is 6 months, with no limit on the number of terms. TSC members vote publically via [PR, email?]. Voters rate candidates on a ballot in the order of preferences; same preference can be given to multiple candidates. A winner is selected using [Shulze variant of Condorset method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method). Tie is broken with [Governance voting](https://github.com/StackStorm/st2/blob/master/GOVERNANCE.md#conflict-resolution-and-voting).
Copy link
Member

@arm4b arm4b Nov 3, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looking at the other LF projects election process would be great to follow the practices like:

  • Nomination phase: 1 week? - This is a stage when members self-nominate and provide their statement of intent on why they would be a good person to hold this position and what are their plans and vision. I think https://github.com/stackstorm/discussions perfectly fits that as existing platform.
  • Election phase: 1 week - this conforms with the voting period 1 week, per existing st2 Governance.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

1 week for each seems fair

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does there need to be a quorum as well on the voting, so at least 60% of TSC members have voted?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like the idea of a quorum. ..but what happens if the election phase passes (i.e. >1w) and there's not a quorum?


### Maintainer responsibilities
* In general dedicate at least 1+ full day per week (summarized) on StackStorm development.
Expand Down
Loading