forked from quarkusio/quarkus
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Merge branch 'quarkusio:main' into quarkusio#41737
- Loading branch information
Showing
130 changed files
with
3,613 additions
and
1,952 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@ | ||
| = Working Groups | ||
|
|
||
| * Status: _accepted_ | ||
| * Date: 2024-07-15 by @cescoffier | ||
| == Context and Problem Statement | ||
|
|
||
| Quarkus is a large project with many contributors. | ||
| It's hard to keep track of all the initiatives and ensure that the community is aware of ongoing work. | ||
| We need a way to organize work around specific topics and ensure that the community is aware of these initiatives. | ||
|
|
||
| We also need to ensure that the work is done transparently and that the community can participate in the discussions. | ||
|
|
||
| This would be the basis of an informal roadmap, where the community can see what is being worked on and what is coming next. | ||
| Our previous attempts to publish and maintain a roadmap were not successful. | ||
| We need a more lightweight approach, focusing on current work and next steps. | ||
|
|
||
| Additionally, new contributors may find it hard to find a way to contribute to the project, as the project's size may be overwhelming. | ||
| Working on a specific area or topic may be more appealing to new contributors and may help them get started. | ||
|
|
||
| == Working Groups | ||
|
|
||
| The idea behind this proposal is to introduce the concept of _working groups_. | ||
| A working group is a lightweight way to organize work around a specific topic. | ||
| It aims to gather people interested in a specific topic and ensure that the work is done transparently. | ||
| It also aims to ensure that the community is aware of ongoing work and can participate in the discussions. | ||
|
|
||
| === Defining a Working Group | ||
|
|
||
| To kick off a working group, let’s make sure we know what we’re getting into. | ||
| Here’s a simple checklist to keep things clear and manageable: | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Clear Goal: What exactly do the working group want to achieve? | ||
| Make sure the group has a straightforward, easy-to-understand goal. | ||
| The scope of the group must be carefully defined. | ||
| 2. Trackable Progress: How will we know the group is making progress? | ||
| GitHub issues will be the primary way to publicize the progress. | ||
| Other means like regular GitHub project updates can be used. | ||
| 3. Realistic Aim: The working group goal must be achievable within a reasonable timeframe. | ||
| It’s better to break down large ideas into smaller working groups, one at a time. | ||
| 4. End in Sight: When will we be done? Even if there’s no strict deadline, a working group should have an idea of what ‘done’ looks like. | ||
|
|
||
| Once the scope of a working group is defined, it should be announced on GitHub discussions under the https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/discussions/categories/design-discussions[Design Discussion category]. | ||
| This way, the community can be aware of ongoing work and participate in the discussions. | ||
| During that time, the definition of the working group can be refined based on the feedback received. | ||
|
|
||
| Here are a few examples: | ||
|
|
||
| - https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/discussions/41309[Working Group: Static Site Generation] | ||
| - https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/discussions/38473[Working Group: WebSocket Next] | ||
| - https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/discussions/41867[Working Group: Test classloading] | ||
|
|
||
| === Organizing a Working Group | ||
|
|
||
| Once a working group has garnered enough interest, a project board should be created, and a main point of contact should be identified. | ||
| A (public) project board should be used to track the progress of the working group. | ||
| It gathers all the related issues and PRs and should be updated regularly. | ||
|
|
||
| It is recommended to use a simple template for the project board, with columns like "to do," "in progress," and "done." | ||
| The board should be updated regularly. | ||
| The _status_ of the working group should be updated, and the related issues should be added to the board. | ||
| It is important that the board does not remain stale. | ||
|
|
||
| Depending on where the main part of the work is done, the board can be created in the Quarkus organization or in the Quarkiverse organization. | ||
|
|
||
| On the board, a short description of the working group should be added, along with the proposed scope and the main point of contact. | ||
|
|
||
| === Point of Contact and Communication | ||
|
|
||
| The point of contact is the main entry point for the working group. | ||
| Both the community and the team can reach out to this person to get more information about the working group or to participate. | ||
| The point of contact should be available on GitHub and Zulip, ensuring that communication is done transparently. | ||
| A working group may have multiple points of contact, depending on the size and scope of the group. | ||
|
|
||
| Most communication should be done on GitHub discussions, issues, and PRs. | ||
| If the working group needs to organize calls, these calls should be open to everyone in the community. | ||
| It is important for the working group to publish the outcome of these discussions and possible decisions made during these calls. | ||
|
|
||
| === Participating in a Working Group | ||
|
|
||
| Anyone can participate in a working group. | ||
| The working group should be open to everyone, and the discussions should be done transparently. | ||
| The point of contact and the other contributors should ensure that the discussions are respectful and that everyone can participate and contribute. | ||
|
|
||
| === Driving a Working Group | ||
|
|
||
| Ideally, once a week, an update should be posted on the board and on the GitHub discussion. | ||
| The update should summarize the progress made during the week, the next steps, and include a status (on track, at risk, off track, complete). | ||
| It's important to keep the community aware of ongoing work and ensure that the working group is making progress, identifying the next steps, and so on. | ||
|
|
||
| It might be interesting to publish demos, blog posts, or other content to keep the community aware of ongoing work. | ||
|
|
||
| === Completing a Working Group | ||
|
|
||
| Once the goal of the working group is achieved, the working group should be closed. | ||
| The outcome of the working group should be published on GitHub discussions, and the project board should be archived (status set to `complete`). | ||
|
|
||
| The outcome of a working group can be various: | ||
|
|
||
| - _Technical contribution_: It can be a set of identified issues and PRs that have been resolved. | ||
| - _ADR_: The outcome of a working group may end up proposing an ADR to capture the decisions made during the working group. | ||
| - _Documentation_: The outcome of a working group may be a set of documentation updates. | ||
| - _Blog posts / Demos / Videos_: The outcome of a working group may be a blog post to summarize the work done or a demo/video. | ||
| - _Exploratory work_: The outcome of a working group may be a set of exploratory work that will be used to drive the next steps. | ||
|
|
||
| === Maximum Number of Working Groups | ||
|
|
||
| We should limit the number of working groups running concurrently to avoid overwhelming contributors. | ||
| The exact number should be defined based on the capacity of the team and the community. | ||
| It is better to have a few working groups that are making progress than many working groups that are stalled. | ||
|
|
||
| === Working Group Lifecycle | ||
|
|
||
| The lifecycle of a working group is as follows: | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Define the scope of the working group | ||
| 2. Announce the working group on GitHub discussions | ||
| 3. Organize the working group | ||
| 4. Drive the working group | ||
| 5. Complete the working group | ||
|
|
||
| Once a working group is completed, the outcome should be published on GitHub discussions, and the project board should be archived. | ||
|
|
||
| === Working Group vs. Rest of the Work | ||
|
|
||
| Not all work should be done in working groups. | ||
| Working groups are a way to organize work around specific topics, but they should not be the only way to contribute to the project. | ||
| Working groups should be used to drive specific initiatives, but the rest of the work should be done as usual. | ||
|
|
||
| == Considered Options | ||
|
|
||
| === Status Quo | ||
|
|
||
| We continue to work as we are doing now, without any specific organization around the work. | ||
| Under this option, we would not have a way to organize work around specific topics, and the community would not be aware of ongoing work. | ||
| It makes it harder for new contributors to find a way to contribute to the project and to understand the roadmap of the project. | ||
|
|
||
| This approach has been tried in the past and has not been successful. | ||
|
|
||
| === More Formal Organization | ||
|
|
||
| We could introduce a more formal organization around the work, with a more detailed roadmap and a more structured way to organize the work. | ||
| This would require more resources and more time to maintain, and it may be harder to keep up to date. | ||
| It may also be harder for the community to participate in the discussions, making a clear distinction between the _core_ team and the community. | ||
|
|
||
| === Considered Names | ||
|
|
||
| We have considered various names for the _working group_. | ||
| Task force, working group, tiger team, tribe, etc., are some of the names that have been considered. | ||
|
|
||
| We have chosen _working group_ as it is a simple and clear name that reflects the purpose of the group. | ||
| One of the considered benefits is its abbreviation, _WG_, which is easy to understand. | ||
|
|
||
| == Consequences | ||
|
|
||
| === Positive | ||
|
|
||
| * The community is aware of ongoing work and can participate in the discussions. | ||
| * New contributors can find a way to contribute to the project. | ||
| * The work is done transparently. | ||
| * The work is organized around specific topics. | ||
| * The community can see what is being worked on and what is coming next. | ||
|
|
||
| === Negative | ||
|
|
||
| * It requires more work to organize the working groups. | ||
| * It requires more work to keep the working groups up to date. | ||
| * It may be harder to limit the number of working groups running concurrently. | ||
|
|
||
| The proposed working group process is designed to be lightweight and should not require too much overhead, but any coordination effort requires some work. |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.