openstreetmap
Introduce governance documentation and co-maintainers
Recently, we added co-maintainers to the id-tagging-schema repo and used a GOVERNANCE.md doc to describe roles, people and processed.
This change was merged on 2024-08-07.
During the iD Community Meeting on the same day we discussed the extend this setup to iD and the schema builder repo as well.
Today I had a chat with @tyrasd during which we create the doc in this PR that adapts the document from the id-tagging-schema repo for this Project.
The plan we discussed during the community meetup is to have this PR open until after SOTM Kenya to collect feedback.
The main goal of this change is, to introduce co-maintainers (@k-yle and myself) and describe the roles and processes that are used to maintain iD as a community project.
Thanks for this document. I fully support the addition of the two of you as co-maintainers and like that you'd have the ability to merge/close clear-cut PRs yourselves while being involved in the bigger ones.
One small note - I currently have the Triage role on this repo. I could either be added to the document under that section, or removed from having Triage permissions. I'd be happy to continue helping (modestly) with that, especially knowing the project will have additional maintainer bandwidth with three of you. I can submit a commit to this PR if there's interest in me keeping those permissions (or if you'd like to discuss once it's finalized that the three of you are all maintainers).
I currently have the Triage role on this repo. I could either be added to the document under that section…
Sorry @nickrsan for this oversight and thanks for reaching out. I just added you to the doc. We simply forgot to go into details on this section when we copied it over from the id-tagging-schema.
Did we miss anyone else who is still active with the triage role? I don't have access to the permission list. But maybe waiting for feedback here is a good way to see who is still active. :-)
The agreement I take from todays ID Community Chat is, that "we" will not proceed with this PR. I will therefore close it now.
It would be helpful to the community to provide a non-cryptic rationale for closing this ticket. I don't understand why we are rejecting co-maintainers and documenting iD's adoption of the SDRP process. These are both very reasonable steps towards getting iD on a more sustainable footing. It is my impression, and I suspect the impression of many others in the OSM community, that forward progress in developing iD is moving at an unacceptably glacial pace.
Please don't read this as a rejection of the idea of co-maintainers – it's in fact the opposite! The reasoning to not immediately include the particular formulations from this PR is that (co-)maintainership in iD it is better established on a bottom-up approach. As a first step, @k-yle and @1ec5 are invited to engage in a more active way than regular contributors. This includes reviewing external PRs and helping with getting releases done more consistently. Once concrete roles and procedures are established within the project, we can come back to the suggestion from this PR and actually document them.
The SDRP process is IMO sufficiently documented on the osm wiki, isn't it?
For future reference https://astro.build/blog/astro-tsc-2025/ is something we might want to look at if we ever look for more governance structure.