-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
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
Update SIG lifecycle doc #182
Changes from 4 commits
e7057b3
733a702
72a5679
b257531
fd92ff4
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,13 +1,41 @@ | ||
# Special Interest Group (SIG) Life Cycle | ||
|
||
Special Interest Groups are under the direct governance of a Working Group (WG) which can create and close them as necessary and appropriate. SIGs are expected to have a very specific goals and objectives at the time of their creation which may or may not define if they are terminable and is entirely dependent on the nature of the SIG. | ||
Special Interest Groups are bound to achieving a very specific goal. These groups may be terminated upon completion of their designating tasking or continued for larger and ongoing efforts. The creation of a SIG must dictate the focus, intent, goals, and deliverable(s) as appropriate. SIGs may report to a WG or directly to the TAC as their governing body. | ||
|
||
The lifecycle of SIGs is therefore minimal and as follows. | ||
It is expected that the primary output of a SIG is not software. If the primary output is software, the work should be organized as a [project](./project-lifecycle.md). | ||
|
||
## Active | ||
SIG process should be minimal, however we do need some process to at least ensure we have an accurate list of all the active SIGs in the OpenSSF. This document uses "must" to describe what items are required, "should" to suggest items that should be strongly considered (but not required), and "may" for suggested guidance. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm not sure which part the "why" is directed at. If it's the first part (the SIG process should be minimal) that's so there's less process friction and contributors can focus on their work and not navigating undue process. In case the "why" is directed at the second part, we need a list of active SIGs to understand the activities of OpenSSF contributors for reporting on progress, ensuring the work is compatible with the OpenSSF's mission, etc. |
||
|
||
* The SIG is actively pursuing its goal. | ||
The SIG life cycle begins with interested contributors deciding to undertake this process, at which time the SIG is `Tentative`. A SIG becomes `Active` when a governing body agrees to take it on, at which point the SIG goes about achieving its goals and deliverables. Once that work is completed, or if the effort stalls out, the SIG becomes `End-of-Life` and some administrative cleanup will be done. The details for each phase follow. | ||
|
||
## Inactive | ||
## To become `Tentative`: | ||
steiza marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
* The SIG is no longer active, either it has completed its mission or the mission was abandoned. At which state, the WG the SIG is under will determine a termination status and record it within the corresponding repository. | ||
* This is the default state of a new SIG that is not yet active | ||
|
||
## To become `Active`: | ||
|
||
* A governing body must agree to govern the SIG | ||
* The governing body may have its membership vote, with notice given at the meeting prior to the vote | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Do we have a definition of membership outside of the TAC? This has come up as a point of contention before. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. No, but this is good follow-on work! |
||
|
||
## Once `Active`: | ||
|
||
* The governing body must list information about the SIG on its README, including current state, chairs, and a statement of focus, intent, goals, and/or deliverables | ||
* SIGs may have a repository (prefixed with `sig-`) that include the information listed above | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I actually don't think the |
||
* SIGs may have regular meetings separate from their governing body, if so: | ||
* They should appear on the OpenSSF calendar | ||
* They should have a document with upcoming agendas and notes from past meetings | ||
|
||
## To become `End-of-Life`: | ||
|
||
* The chairs of a SIG can decide to conclude their work, in which case they must notify their governing body | ||
* The chairs of the governing body must periodically review their active SIGs and determine if any should end | ||
* This review should happen at least annually | ||
* The chairs of the governing body may have its membership vote, with notice given at the meeting prior to the vote | ||
|
||
## Once `End-of-Life` | ||
|
||
* The governing body must update their README to reflect that the SIG has ended | ||
* They should list the SIG as end-of-life instead of removing it completely | ||
* If a repository exists, it should be marked read-only | ||
* If meetings are on the OpenSSF calendar, they should be removed | ||
* Any other administrative items (mailing lists, docs) should similarly be put to closure as needed |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we have any mechanisms for a SIG turning into a project? I have seen discussion in some of the groups that a body of work starts off mostly with a white paper or similar deliverable but over time there's interest in potentially extending it into code?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, but this is good follow-on work!