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

Add Guidance document #1

Closed
tayloramurphy opened this issue Oct 8, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Add Guidance document #1

tayloramurphy opened this issue Oct 8, 2021 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@tayloramurphy
Copy link
Contributor

We should detail:

  • Expectations to get a connector added to the hub in terms of quality / testing / etc.
  • Expectations of a maintainer
  • How we manage permissions and teams

Proposals from @aaronsteers:

  1. Whenever we receive a PR for a tap/target that has no maintainers, we announce this to the contributor.
  2. If no maintainers, perhaps we post the MR into a Slack channel somewhere to request community review. Known past contributors get flagged by name.
  3. If no one from the community responds in a timely manner, we can offer that person to become a contributor if they have a history of contributing to Meltano and/or other open source projects. (We can use their GitHub history to help in this evaluation process.)
  4. Any successfully-merged MR automatically promotes that person to "contributor", perhaps also to maintainer if they've consented in step 3 and no other maintainers exist.

As I've worked recently in tap-athena and target-athena, and other repos, I think we need to be more direct in our asks of community contributors. Everyone seems reluctant to take on responsibility so I think it is work considering pairing that responsibility with the review process itself - when they are most incentivized to agree (and get their manager's buy-in).

@tayloramurphy tayloramurphy self-assigned this Oct 8, 2021
@pnadolny13
Copy link
Contributor

In addition to expectations to get an existing connector added we should have some sort of review process for connectors built new from within MeltanoLabs, related to #2. After expectations are met we can remove the beta/experimental/under development flag from that repo.

@pnadolny13
Copy link
Contributor

pnadolny13 commented Nov 19, 2021

#4 addresses the majority of this issue. I'm going to close it and create a new issue specifically for permissions which wasn't explicitly addressed yet.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants