Loading policy.md +1 −1 Original line number Diff line number Diff line Loading @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@ and add it to the above list. ## Draft * [TPA-RFC-3: tools](policy/tpa-rfc-3-tools) * [TPA-RFC-9: "proposed" status and small process changes](tpa-rfc-9-proposed-process) ## Standard Loading @@ -29,3 +28,4 @@ and add it to the above list. ## Obsolete * [TPA-RFC-4: Prometheus disk space change](policy/tpa-rfc-4-prometheus-disk) * [TPA-RFC-9: "proposed" status and small process changes](tpa-rfc-9-proposed-process) policy/tpa-rfc-1-policy.md +33 −15 Original line number Diff line number Diff line Loading @@ -70,12 +70,12 @@ and a unique, incremental number. This proposal, for example, is ## Process When the proposal is first written and the notification is sent, the proposal is considered a `draft`. It then enters a discussion period during which changes can be proposed and objections can be raised. That period ranges from 2 business days and two weeks and is picked in good faith by the proposer based on the urgency of the changes proposed. When the proposal is first written, the proposal is considered a `draft`. When a notification is sent, the proposal is in the `proposed` state and then enters a discussion period during which changes can be proposed and objections can be raised. That period ranges from 2 business days and two weeks and is picked in good faith by the proposer based on the urgency of the changes proposed. Objections must be formulated constructively and justified with reasonable technical or social explanations. The goal of this step is Loading @@ -91,26 +91,38 @@ mitigate those problems. A proposal is in any of the following states: 1. `draft` 2. `proposed` 2. `standard` 3. `rejected` 4. `obsolete` Here is a graph of the possible state transitions:  Once the discussion period has passed and no objection is raised, the `draft` is adopted and becomes a `standard`. `proposed` RFC is adopted and becomes a `standard`. If objections are raised and no solution is found, the proposal is `rejected`. Some policies can be completely overriden using the current policy process, including this policy, in which case the old policy because `obsolete`. Note that a policy can be modified by later proposals. The older policy is modified only when the new one becomes `standard`. For example, say `TPA-RFC-X` proposes changes to a previous `TPA-RFC-N` proposal. In that case, the text of `TPA-RFC-N` would be modified when and only if `TPA-RFC-X` becomes a `standard`. The older `TPA-RFC-N` would also stay a `standard`. `obsolete`. Old, one-time decisions can also be marked as `obsolete` when it's clear they do not need to be listed in the main policy standards. A policy can also be **modified** (instead of **overridden** by later proposals or decisions taking in meetings, in which case it stays a `standard`. For TPA-RFC process changes, the older policy is modified only when the new one becomes `standard`. For example, say `TPA-RFC-X` proposes changes to a previous `TPA-RFC-N` proposal. In that case, the text of `TPA-RFC-N` would be modified when and only if `TPA-RFC-X` is adopted as a `standard`. The older `TPA-RFC-N` would also stay a `standard`, although the *newer* `TPA-RFC-X` would actually become `obsolete` as soon as the older `TPA-RFC-N` is modified. # Examples Loading @@ -134,6 +146,12 @@ Counter examples: * picking a different hardware configuration for the new ganeti node (process wasn't documented explicitely, we accept honest mistakes) Examples of obsolete proposals: * [TPA-RFC-4: prometheus disk](tpa-rfc-4-prometheus-disk) was marked as obsolete a while after the change was implemented. # Deadline Considering that the proposal was discussed and informally approved at Loading policy/tpa-rfc-9-proposed-process.md +1 −1 Original line number Diff line number Diff line Loading @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ December 17th. # Status This proposal is currently in the `draft` state. This proposal is currently in the `obsolete` state. # References Loading Loading
policy.md +1 −1 Original line number Diff line number Diff line Loading @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@ and add it to the above list. ## Draft * [TPA-RFC-3: tools](policy/tpa-rfc-3-tools) * [TPA-RFC-9: "proposed" status and small process changes](tpa-rfc-9-proposed-process) ## Standard Loading @@ -29,3 +28,4 @@ and add it to the above list. ## Obsolete * [TPA-RFC-4: Prometheus disk space change](policy/tpa-rfc-4-prometheus-disk) * [TPA-RFC-9: "proposed" status and small process changes](tpa-rfc-9-proposed-process)
policy/tpa-rfc-1-policy.md +33 −15 Original line number Diff line number Diff line Loading @@ -70,12 +70,12 @@ and a unique, incremental number. This proposal, for example, is ## Process When the proposal is first written and the notification is sent, the proposal is considered a `draft`. It then enters a discussion period during which changes can be proposed and objections can be raised. That period ranges from 2 business days and two weeks and is picked in good faith by the proposer based on the urgency of the changes proposed. When the proposal is first written, the proposal is considered a `draft`. When a notification is sent, the proposal is in the `proposed` state and then enters a discussion period during which changes can be proposed and objections can be raised. That period ranges from 2 business days and two weeks and is picked in good faith by the proposer based on the urgency of the changes proposed. Objections must be formulated constructively and justified with reasonable technical or social explanations. The goal of this step is Loading @@ -91,26 +91,38 @@ mitigate those problems. A proposal is in any of the following states: 1. `draft` 2. `proposed` 2. `standard` 3. `rejected` 4. `obsolete` Here is a graph of the possible state transitions:  Once the discussion period has passed and no objection is raised, the `draft` is adopted and becomes a `standard`. `proposed` RFC is adopted and becomes a `standard`. If objections are raised and no solution is found, the proposal is `rejected`. Some policies can be completely overriden using the current policy process, including this policy, in which case the old policy because `obsolete`. Note that a policy can be modified by later proposals. The older policy is modified only when the new one becomes `standard`. For example, say `TPA-RFC-X` proposes changes to a previous `TPA-RFC-N` proposal. In that case, the text of `TPA-RFC-N` would be modified when and only if `TPA-RFC-X` becomes a `standard`. The older `TPA-RFC-N` would also stay a `standard`. `obsolete`. Old, one-time decisions can also be marked as `obsolete` when it's clear they do not need to be listed in the main policy standards. A policy can also be **modified** (instead of **overridden** by later proposals or decisions taking in meetings, in which case it stays a `standard`. For TPA-RFC process changes, the older policy is modified only when the new one becomes `standard`. For example, say `TPA-RFC-X` proposes changes to a previous `TPA-RFC-N` proposal. In that case, the text of `TPA-RFC-N` would be modified when and only if `TPA-RFC-X` is adopted as a `standard`. The older `TPA-RFC-N` would also stay a `standard`, although the *newer* `TPA-RFC-X` would actually become `obsolete` as soon as the older `TPA-RFC-N` is modified. # Examples Loading @@ -134,6 +146,12 @@ Counter examples: * picking a different hardware configuration for the new ganeti node (process wasn't documented explicitely, we accept honest mistakes) Examples of obsolete proposals: * [TPA-RFC-4: prometheus disk](tpa-rfc-4-prometheus-disk) was marked as obsolete a while after the change was implemented. # Deadline Considering that the proposal was discussed and informally approved at Loading
policy/tpa-rfc-9-proposed-process.md +1 −1 Original line number Diff line number Diff line Loading @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ December 17th. # Status This proposal is currently in the `draft` state. This proposal is currently in the `obsolete` state. # References Loading
