Add GitHub organization documentation #26
Conversation
jwflory
added
new page
docs/administration/github-org.rst
Outdated
|
|
||
| The GitHub organization is a central place to manage club projects, an | ||
| approximation of membership, and host some of our infrastructure. Most data is | ||
| static and doesn't change often. The GitHub organization is usually relevant by |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not entirely sure what you mean by "GitHub org is usually relevant by individual club projects..." The wording is a little off to me.
docs/administration/github-org.rst
Outdated
| ******* | ||
|
|
||
| The GitHub organization is a central place to manage club projects, an | ||
| approximation of membership, and host some of our infrastructure. Most data is |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Change wording a little.
"The GitHub organization is a central place to manage club projects, membership, and infrastructure."
This allows more concise wording. If you want any other changes feel free to ping me.
|
@Tjzabel Thanks, really subtle but really helpful feedback. I reworded. Could you please re-review? |
docs/administration/github-org.rst
Outdated
| #. **Members**: RIT students, faculty, and staff participating in RITlug (does | ||
| not include permissions) | ||
|
|
||
| #. **TigerOS Team**: `TigerOS`_ project team (grants admin access to TigerOS |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jflory7 This is actually incorrect. There is a separate TigerOS Admins team for the. The TigerOS Team grants write permission.
jwflory
force-pushed
the
add/github-org
branch
from
4b64f37 to
28517a2
Compare
|
@axk4545 Thanks, I pushed a new commit to address your feedback. |
| Adding new members | ||
| ****************** | ||
|
|
||
| There is no criteria for adding new members to the RITlug GitHub organization. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Really? This also contradicts the "active community members" on L39.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ct-martin When I said we don't have criteria for adding new members, we do not have a firm set of criteria, e.g. attend X number of meetings, participate over X amount of time, etc.
What change are you suggesting?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jflory7 At the very least, not saying there are no criteria. If I remember correctly, the "technical" definition for Club Office is attending three meetings/semester (correct me if I'm wrong). While this may seem like an unlikely scenario, what we don't want to have happen is someone who none of us have ever interacted with coming and waving this in our face.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ct-martin I think this fits into a larger discussion for our club membership. I am not aware of any existing guideline / requirement even to club office for our membership. As it is now, there really is not any criteria. I only add people when I remember.
We can move a membership discussion to RITlug/tasks, but I don't think this should block this PR. We can go back and make a change after we consider general membership criteria.
Personally, I would like club members to ask to be included in the GitHub organization. In your scenario you gave, we can use our own discretion for how to answer. If someone who we never see asks to be included in our GitHub organization, I would not consider them an active community member and would use that as my reply.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jflory7 In that case, I would put being an active community member as the criteria, or just drop the line in favor of L39, "Active community members of RITlug should be added to the GitHub organization."
I'm going to maintain my blocking review and cite your response to my scenario as additional reasoning for why.
jwflory
force-pushed
the
add/github-org
branch
from
63644e0 to
d4165a3
Compare
| other than being an active community member. In the future, if a membership | ||
| criteria is developed, this section should be updated. | ||
|
|
||
| Active community members of RITlug should be added to the GitHub organization. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
With the new commit, this becomes redundant. Maybe a horizontal line if you don't want to keep it like this? I'm going to dismiss my blocking review, but I'm not going to approve the PR since this feels awkward to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's okay. It's important we keep good habits of keeping things well-maintained over time – commit early, commit often. If it's not perfect now, we can always revisit. I think a membership discussion is more important to clarifying this, but it won't be solved relatively soon to block this PR.
This PR adds a new page for the GitHub organization. It documents a bit of how we use it and also why we do things in a specific way.
Please merge this after +2 approved reviews.
Tracking RITlug/tasks#8