Update the governance review template to match the new checklists #749
Conversation
…ecklist. Update issue template accordingly. Signed-off-by: Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
| @@ -23,171 +11,207 @@ Exemplary: project has an extraordinary level of governance development and impl | |||
| Satisfactory: project has appropriate governance for its maturity level and is following that governance | |||
| Mostly Satisfactory: project has mostly appropriate governance, but needs to fix one or two things | |||
| Needs Work: project's governance is lacking and inadequate for its current level of maturity, and needs substantial work to overcome that | |||
|
|
|||
| NOTE: Fill this part as a summary of your review. It is recommended to start from the "Review" section below in the template. | |||
| In Crisis: project appears to be having a meltdown and needs CNCF intervention to survive | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| In Crisis: project appears to be having a meltdown and needs CNCF intervention to survive | |
| In Crisis: project appears to have several outstanding, critical issues that require attention, clarity, and/or direct guidance from CNCF in order to return to a state of good health and standing. |
|
|
||
| Items in the "Governance Findings Table" at the bottom with "Critical" importance should be reported here. | ||
| <!--- The items in the list should be summarized, have a prioritized ordering and are expected to be considered Critical or High, they are usually blockers to project advancement. For each item in this list, a corresponding detailed description should be supplied. Note that which items are required depends on the project's maturity level. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <!--- The items in the list should be summarized, have a prioritized ordering and are expected to be considered Critical or High, they are usually blockers to project advancement. For each item in this list, a corresponding detailed description should be supplied. Note that which items are required depends on the project's maturity level. | |
| <!--- The items in the list should be summarized, have a prioritized ordering and are expected to be considered Critical or High, these are explicit and implicit blockers to project advancement within the [CNCF Matriculation process](https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/main/process#how-to-apply-to-move-levels). For each item in this list, a corresponding detailed description should be supplied. Note that which items are required depends on the project's maturity level. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggesting explicit and implicit be added here. Explicit being named criteria, implicit being something happening that inhibits or fails to meet the intent of the explicit criteria which would otherwise appear met.
| The project includes the following sub-projects, plugins, and other notable divisions: | ||
|
|
||
| <!--- How has the project's governance evolved over time? Is the project steadily refining/advancing its governance as the project grows and resolves issues? ---> | ||
| | Area | Ownership and Operation | Communications | Project Alignment | Notes | | ||
| |:-----|:-----------------------:|:---------------:|:------------------|:---| | ||
| |*sub-project*| Complete/Partial/Missing | Complete/Partial/Other | Complete/Partial/Conflict | | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so we have a requirement that subprojects are listed, should a link to that listing be included in the governance review in addition to the evaluation table?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not quite following? What are you suggesting to add here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in its simplest form:
The project maintains a listing of sub-projects located here: $LINK
The sub-projects, plugins, and other notable divisions are as follows:
$TABLE
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this would provide an referenceable link to items included, and could surface a mis-alignment with the listed subprojects and discovered sub-projects.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Aha. Yeah, that's good when the project has a list. Most projects don't; usually their application is the first time they actually make a list. I'll write it as a swap in the template.
This is the first part of this cleanup. It updates our governance review template to match the items on the Incubating/Graduating checklist. This lets us review the material supplied by the project directly.
The next part will be finishing the self-assessment guide to match.