Add a tag for affiliation diversity
Change-Id: Ib6e2a0f2c6ebd620148620a48abd2447bb360479
This commit is contained in:
parent
62d2514ccd
commit
3d4f52e61c
|
@ -9,3 +9,4 @@
|
|||
release_independent
|
||||
release_at-6mo-cycle-end
|
||||
release_managed
|
||||
team_diverse-affiliation
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
|
|||
::
|
||||
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
|
||||
Unported License.
|
||||
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
========================================================================
|
||||
team:diverse-affiliation
|
||||
========================================================================
|
||||
|
||||
A project with this tag has achieved a level of diversity in the affiliation of
|
||||
contributors that is indicative of a healthy collaborative project. This tag
|
||||
exists in the 'team' category, which as the name implies, covers information
|
||||
about the team itself. Another example of a tag that could exist in this
|
||||
category is one that conveys the size of the team that is actively contributing.
|
||||
|
||||
Rationale
|
||||
=========
|
||||
|
||||
We value having a broad base of contributors to a project for several reasons.
|
||||
One such reason is that it's more risky to rely on a project controlled by a
|
||||
single company as the project will immediately come to a halt if that one
|
||||
company chooses to stop working on it. We also value a project where priorities
|
||||
must be set and agreed upon in a community fashion instead of purely controlled
|
||||
by a single company.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Requirements
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
No one company should represent a majority (>50%) of any of the following:
|
||||
|
||||
* the sum of all commits merged into any of the git repositories managed by the
|
||||
team
|
||||
|
||||
* the sum of all reviews done against patches submitted to any of the git
|
||||
repositories managed by the team
|
||||
|
||||
* the sum of all reviews done by core reviewers against patches submitted to any
|
||||
of the git repositories managed by the team
|
||||
|
||||
* the union of the memberships of the core review teams associated with the git
|
||||
repositories managed by the team
|
||||
|
||||
The timeline used for evaluation is aligned with the 6-month release cycle. The
|
||||
current cycle's timeline should be used unless the cycle has not yet been longer
|
||||
than 2 months, in which case the previous cycle should be used. This definition
|
||||
is purely for convenience, as it makes it easy to check using existing tools
|
||||
(stackalytics, in particular).
|
||||
|
||||
Based on how requirements are defined, this tag is only applicable for projects
|
||||
where their primary deliverables are represented by commits and reviews in git.
|
||||
An example of where this doesn't make sense is the release management team.
|
||||
|
||||
It would be better to use a fixed 6-month window for this. Once we come up with
|
||||
a convenient way to evaluate this criteria against a fixed 6-month window, the
|
||||
requirements can be changed.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Tag application process
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
|
||||
The criteria for this tag is very objective. The TC could approve any future
|
||||
updates to the tag definition and otherwise defer application of the tag. A
|
||||
method for delegating this is TBD, so in the meantime, we default back to the
|
||||
following process:
|
||||
|
||||
Anyone may propose adding or removing this tag to a set of projects by
|
||||
proposing a change to the openstack/governance repository. The change is
|
||||
reviewed by the Technical Committee and approved using standard resolution
|
||||
approval rules, including discussion at at least one Technical Committee
|
||||
public IRC meeting.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Deprecation
|
||||
===========
|
||||
|
||||
There is no deprecation period required for this tag. It can be added or
|
||||
removed at any time.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Attributes
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
This tag has no attributes.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Application to current projects
|
||||
===============================
|
||||
|
||||
It's worth pointing out that the criteria used for this tag is applied across
|
||||
all git repositories managed by a team. However, tags are applied to repos.
|
||||
So, the result is that an evaluation is done for the whole team and either all
|
||||
repos or none get the tag.
|
||||
|
||||
Using the current criteria, the following teams would have the tag applied to
|
||||
their repositories::
|
||||
|
||||
<Team> (top commit % | top review % | top core review % | (top core reviewer %)
|
||||
Nova (20.03% | 20.03% | 26.07% | 31.25%)
|
||||
Swift (27.78% | 27.61% | 38.08% | 36.36%)
|
||||
Glance (24.05% | 29.76% | 40.07% | 33.33%)
|
||||
Keystone (43.08% | 29.40% | 45.95% | 37.50%)
|
||||
Horizon (28.41% | 15.90% | 21.84% | 30.77%)
|
||||
Neutron (26.74% | 19.60% | 24.33% | 16.67%)
|
||||
Cinder (12.59% | 11.36% | 16.49% | 20.00%)
|
||||
Heat (33.15% | 34.04% | 37.94% | 27.78%)
|
||||
Trove (34.02% | 36.00% | 46.20% | 42.86%)
|
||||
Ironic (25.13% | 28.41% | 31.16% | 33.33%)
|
||||
Oslo (30.90% | 28.30% | 34.65% | 23.68%)
|
||||
Infrastructure (38.69% | 49.80% | 48.23% | 42.22%)
|
||||
Documentation (19.72% | 26.67% | 34.89% | 19.05%)
|
||||
Quality Assurance (27.22% | 26.81% | 33.65% | 33.33%)
|
||||
|
||||
The following official projects would not get the tag::
|
||||
|
||||
Ceilometer (52.02% | 32.20% | 61.99% | 50.00%)
|
||||
TripleO (54.59% | 56.19% | 62.69% | 60.87%)
|
||||
Sahara (53.08% | 59.00% | 60.75% | 57.14%)
|
||||
Barbican (50.35% | 48.97% | 52.81% | 50.00%)
|
||||
Manila (47.27% | 31.72% | 45.84% | 50.00%)
|
||||
Zaqar (48.24% | 66.90% | 78.51% | 66.67%)
|
||||
Designate (55.80% | 63.66% | 64.11% | 60.00%)
|
||||
OpenStackClient (34.52% | 36.89% | 56.60% | 33.33%)
|
||||
|
||||
We can also look at whether currently proposed projects would receive the tag.
|
||||
Magnum would, while Murano and Group Based Policy would not::
|
||||
|
||||
Murano (84.91% | 93.20% | 99.26% | 87.50%)
|
||||
Group Based Policy (47.96% | 57.31% | 58.20% | 33.33%)
|
||||
Magnum (33.78% | 37.08% | 37.22% | 28.57%)
|
||||
|
||||
A script used when checking the projects:
|
||||
https://gist.github.com/russellb/cc89a390eefbb33e252b
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue