-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 137
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement an Activity Policy #651
Comments
Prior art:
(Not trying to make any particular point. Just adding some context/information about what's already done.) |
Your suggestions make sense to me. In line with what @Trott implemented in the prior art that he mentioned, it should be automated and I think the way it was done where it generates a PR is a good way to review/land versus the automation just automatically making changes. |
Agree that it should be automated and via PR. If we've already got existing infrastructure in Actions, I think it makes sense to re-use that infrastructure. |
I like this idea. We might want to also add |
@mmarchini done |
I'd like to recommend that we introduce an Activity Policy for organization membership to reduce the manual workload of maintaining organization membership and attempt to reduce the surface area for potential issues caused by escalated privileges.
I think we can probably be incredibly lenient in what we consider "activity". I'd consider the following "activity", in the nodejs, pkgjs, and nodejs-private orgs:
org:nodejs author:bnb created:>2021-01-01
)org:nodejs commenter:bnb created:>2021-01-01
)org:nodejs reviewed-by:bnb created:>2021-01-01
)I would also include "reacting to an Issue, PR, or Discussion" but it doesn't seem like GitHub has an API that would surface that information. If people think of more things to check programmatically that could be added, I'm wholly onboard with that. I believe our goal should be to consume as many signals as possible, and given that we've consistently decided to centralize on GitHub I think using every available signal is a reasonable way to parse "has this person engaged with the project".
In terms of "what is the scope and approach":
Would love to hear thoughts on this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: