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

EDR 5 - maintainers committee composition #25

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
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
39 changes: 39 additions & 0 deletions engineering-decision-records/005-amaru-maintainers-committee.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
---
type: process
status: accepted
---

# Amaru maintainers committee composition

## Context

Amaru is meant to be(come) a rather large and complex project, spanning over multiple years.

The ambition of the project is to build a new fully interoperable block-producing node for improving the overall performance the Cardano blockchain.

The Amaru node wants to provide a simplified entry point for building things on Cardano by using a modular design and Rust as its main coding language.

## Motivation

In order to manage the decision making on the project and have a compelling product oversight, Matthias and Santiago want to extend their maintainers committee's responsibilities to other members.

## Decision

Here is the new composition of the Amaru maintainers committee:

| Matthias Benkort <br/> [@KtorZ][] | Santiago Carmuega <br/> [@scarmuega][] |Andrew Westberg <br/> [@AndrewWestberg][] | Arnaud Bailly <br/> [@abailly][] | Chris Gianelloni <br/> [@wolf31o2][] | Pi Lanningham <br/> [@Quantumplation][] | Sebastien Guillemot <br/> [@wolf31o2][] |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |

[@KtorZ]: https://github.com/ktorz
[@scarmuega]: https://github.com/scarmuega
[@AndrewWestberg]: https://github.com/AndrewWestberg
[@abailly]: https://github.com/abailly
[@wolf31o2]: https://github.com/wolf31o2
[@Quantumplation]: https://github.com/quantumplation
[@sebastienGllmt]: https://github.com/sebastienGllmt
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Would it make sense to have the general bounded-contexts be reflected here, with their responsible maintainers?


## Discussion points

- We need to have a diverse enough point of view in the maintainers committee to enlighten the decision making process
- Each scope owner on the project still has the decision making power for everything that relates specifically to his scope
- The maintainer committee reach a decision by having a minimum of four votes in favour of a decisions for it to be accepted