Repository: document expectations from CODEOWNERS / Plugin Owners

[BethGriggs]

I think it'd be useful to document some expectations from workspace CODEOWNERS, perhaps as part of the docs/plugin-maintainers-guide.md.

Off the top of my head, I think it should cover things like:

• Expectations around approving PRs and triaging issues
• Expectation around adopting new Backstage versions (with Version Bump)
• [ ] What happens when someone no longer has the capacity to be a CODEOWNER?
• [ ] When is a plugin considered inactive?
• [ ] What happens to unmaintained plugins?

Some of these aspects may require more discussion than others - we can start with the simpler guidance and requirements around PR/issue triage.

The rationale for this is that as the plugin repository grows the maintenance cost will grow too. Having clear expectations should help keep the @backstage/community-plugins-maintainers' maintenance load manageable. I also do not think it would be sustainable for all plugins to de facto return to @backstage/community-plugins-maintainers in the case they become unmaintained/no CODEOWNER.

---

• https://github.com/backstage/community-plugins/pull/3229

[awanlin]

Yes, this would be awesome!

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[BethGriggs]

Still some todo items here, converted description into a checklist

[BethGriggs]

Spinning out the last remaining task here to a dedicated issue https://github.com/backstage/community-plugins/issues/4619