Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs

["Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Rich,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Salz, Rich <[e-mail]>
> Sent: 18 March 2020 14:44
> To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <[e-mail]>; Warren Kumari
> <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>; [e-mail], <ietf-and-
> [e-mail]>; Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs
> 
> >    If the consensus is that it is okay for the Secretariat to be owner
> of all of the WG repos, then I suggest the list of owners be:
>      MUST Secretariat & Responsible AD (which automatically enforces a
> minimum of 2)
>      MAY WG chairs & other ADs for the area.
> 
> This will not work because the WG chairs, as owners, will need to do the
> day-to-day things like creating repo's for I-D's, creating teams for those
> I-D's, etc.
[RW] 

Isn't that a split between organizational owner vs admins?  I.e. the WG
chairs are admins for the repositories, but the organization owners are the
Secretariat, responsible AD(s), and perhaps chairs.


FWIW, the current text in github-02 is this:

2.1.  Organizations

   Organizations are a way of forming groups of contributors on GitHub.
   Each Working Group SHOULD create a new organization for the Working
   Group.  A Working Group organization SHOULD be named consistently so
   that it can be found.  For instance, the name could be ietf-<wgname>
   or ietf-<wgname>-wg.

   A single organization SHOULD NOT be used for all IETF activity, or
   all activity within an area.  Large organizations create too much
   overhead for general management tasks, particularly when there is a
   need to maintain membership.

   Each organization requires owners.  The owner team for a Working
   Group repository MUST include responsible Area Directors.  Area
   Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an owner and
   Working Group chairs MAY also be owners.

   A team with administrator access SHOULD be created for the Working
   Group Chairs and any Working Group Secretary.  Administrator access
   is preferable, since this does not also include the ability to push
   to all repositories and ownership does not grant any other
   significant privileges.

   Details about creating organizations adhering to these guidelines can
   be found in [GIT-CONFIG].


My suggestion is to change the third paragraph to something like this,
and leave the rest the same:

   Each organization requires owners.  The owner team for a Working
   Group repository MUST include the responsible Area Director(s) and the
   Secretariat.  Other Area Directors for the area responsible for
   the Working Group MAY also be owners.  Area Directors MAY also
   designate a delegate that becomes an owner and Working Group chairs
   MAY also be owners.

What you are proposing seems to be a larger change, i.e. taking the ADs
out of the loop altogether?


If the consensus is that it is okay for the Secretariat to be owner
> of all of the WG organizations, then I suggest the list of owners be:
>      MUST Secretariat & Responsible AD (which automatically enforces a
> minimum of 2)
>      MAY WG chairs & other ADs for the area.


> 
> I view the AD as a backup.  Many WG chairs have longer tenure than the AD
> who is responsible.

I completely agree that it is the WG chairs who will do the day-to-day
administration, but it will seem to be somewhat strange if the github
organization hierarchy doesn’t somewhat match the IETF organizational
hierarchy.

Regards,
Rob

[For clarity, no hats, besides I'm still only an incoming AD anyway ...]