1.. _project_roles: 2 3TSC Project Roles 4***************** 5 6Project Roles 7############# 8 9TSC projects generally will involve *Maintainers*, *Collaborators*, and 10*Contributors*: 11 12**Maintainer**: lead Collaborators on an area identified by the TSC (e.g. 13Architecture, code subsystems, etc.). Maintainers shall also serve as the 14area’s representative on the TSC as needed. Maintainers may become voting 15members of the TSC under the guidelines stated in the project Charter. 16 17**Collaborator**: A highly involved Contributor in one or more areas. 18May become a Maintainer with approval of existing TSC voting members. 19 20**Contributor**: anyone in the community that contributes code or 21documentation to the project. Contributors may become Collaborators 22by approval of the existing Collaborators and Maintainers of the 23particular code base areas or subsystems. 24 25 26.. _contributor: 27 28Contributor 29+++++++++++ 30 31A *Contributor* is a developer who wishes to contribute to the project, 32at any level. 33 34Contributors are granted the following rights and responsibilities: 35 36* Right to contribute code, documentation, translations, artwork, etc. 37* Right to report defects (bugs) and suggestions for enhancement. 38* Right to participate in the process of reviewing contributions by others. 39* Right to initiate and participate in discussions in any communication 40 methods. 41* Right to approach any member of the community with matters they believe 42 to be important. 43* Right to participate in the feature development process. 44* Responsibility to abide by decisions, once made. They are welcome to 45 provide new, relevant information to reopen decisions. 46* Responsibility for issues and bugs introduced by one’s own contributions. 47* Responsibility to respect the rules of the community. 48* Responsibility to provide constructive advice whenever participating in 49 discussions and in the review of contributions. 50* Responsibility to follow the project’s code of conduct 51 (https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) 52 53Contributors are initially only given `Read 54<https://docs.github.com/en/organizations/managing-access-to-your-organizations-repositories/repository-permission-levels-for-an-organization>`_ 55access to the Zephyr GitHub repository. Specifically, at the Read access level, 56Contributors are not allowed to assign reviewers to their own pull requests. An 57automated process will assign reviewers. You may also share the pull request on 58the `Zephyr devel mailing list <https://lists.zephyrproject.org/g/devel>`_ or on 59the `Zephyr Discord Server <https://chat.zephyrproject.org>`_. 60 61Contributors who show dedication and skill are granted the Triage permission 62level to the Zephyr GitHub repository. 63 64You may nominate yourself, or another GitHub user, for promotion to the Triage 65permission level by creating a GitHub issue, using the :github:`nomination 66template <new?assignees=&labels=Role+Nomination&template=006_nomination.md&title=>`. 67 68Contributors granted the Triage permission level are permitted to add reviewers 69to a pull request and can be added as a reviewer by other GitHub users. 70Contributor change requests or approval on pull requests are not counted with 71respect to accepting and merging a pull request. However, Contributors comments 72and requested changes should still be considered by the pull request author. 73 74.. _collaborator: 75 76Collaborator 77++++++++++++ 78 79A *Collaborator* is a Contributor who is also responsible for the maintenance 80of Zephyr source code. Their opinions weigh more when decisions are made, in a 81fully meritocratic fashion. 82 83Collaborators have the following rights and responsibilities, 84in addition to those listed for Contributors: 85 86* Right to set goals for the short and medium terms for the project being 87 maintained, alongside the Maintainer. 88* Responsibility to participate in the feature development process. 89* Responsibility to review relevant code changes within reasonable time. 90* Responsibility to ensure the quality of the code to expected levels. 91* Responsibility to participate in community discussions. 92* Responsibility to mentor new contributors when appropriate 93* Responsibility to participate in the quality verification and release 94 process, when those happen. 95 96Contributors are promoted to the Collaborator role by adding the GitHub user 97name to one or more ``collaborators`` sections of the :ref:`maintainers_file` in 98the Zephyr repository. 99 100Collaborator change requests on pull requests should 101be addressed by the original submitter. In cases where the changes requested do 102not follow the :ref:`expectations <reviewer-expectations>` and the guidelines 103of the project or in cases of disagreement, it is the responsibility of the 104assignee to advance the review process and resolve any disagreements. 105 106Collaborator approval of pull requests are counted toward the minimum required 107approvals needed to merge a PR. Other criteria for merging may apply. 108 109 110.. _maintainer: 111 112Maintainer 113++++++++++ 114 115A *Maintainer* is a Collaborator who is also responsible for knowing, 116directing and anticipating the needs of a given zephyr source code area. 117 118Maintainers have the following rights and responsibilities, 119in addition to those listed for Contributors and Collaborators: 120 121* Right to set the overall architecture of the relevant subsystems or areas 122 of involvement. 123* Right to make decisions in the relevant subsystems or areas of involvement, 124 in conjunction with the collaborators and submitters. 125 See :ref:`pr_technical_escalation`. 126* Responsibility to convey the direction of the relevant subsystem or areas to 127 the TSC 128* Responsibility to ensure all contributions of the project have been reviewed 129 within reasonable time. 130* Responsibility to enforce the code of conduct. 131* Responsibility to triage static analysis issues in their code area. 132 See :ref:`static_analysis`. 133 134Contributors or Collaborators are promoted to the Maintainer role by adding the 135GitHub user name to one or more ``maintainers`` sections of the 136:ref:`maintainers_file` in the Zephyr repository. Candidates who are neither 137Contributors nor Collaborators must be approved by the TSC before they can 138assume the role of Maintainer. 139 140Maintainer approval of pull requests are counted toward the minimum 141required approvals needed to merge a PR. Other criteria for merging may apply. 142 143Role Retirement 144############### 145 146* Individuals elected to the following Project roles, including, Maintainer, 147 Release Engineering Team member, Release Manager, but are no longer engaged 148 in the project as described by the rights and responsibilities of that role, 149 may be requested by the TSC to retire from the role they are elected. 150* Such a request needs to be raised as a motion in the TSC and be 151 approved by the TSC voting members. 152 By approval of the TSC the individual is considered to be retired 153 from the role they have been elected. 154* The above applies to elected TSC Project roles that may be defined 155 in addition. 156 157 158Teams and Supporting Activities 159############################### 160 161Assignee 162++++++++ 163 164An *Assignee* is one of the maintainers of a subsystem or code being changed. 165Assignees are set either automatically based on the code being changed or set 166by the other Maintainers, the Release Engineering team can set an assignee when 167the latter is not possible. 168 169* Responsibility to drive the pull request to a mergeable state 170* Right to dismiss stale and unrelated reviews or reviews not following 171 :ref:`expectations <reviewer-expectations>` from reviewers and seek reviews 172 from additional maintainers, developers and contributors 173* Right to block pull requests from being merged until issues or changes 174 requested are addressed 175* Responsibility to re-assign a pull request if they are the original submitter 176 of the code 177* Solicit approvals from maintainers of the subsystems affected 178* Responsibility to drive the :ref:`pr_technical_escalation` process 179 180Static Analysis Audit Team 181++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 182 183The Static Analysis Audit team works closely with the release engineering 184team to ensure that static analysis defects opened during a release 185cycle are properly addressed. The team has the following rights and 186responsibilities: 187 188* Right to revert any triage in a static analysis tool (e.g: Coverity) 189 that does not follow the project expectations. 190* Responsibility to inform code owners about improper classifications. 191* Responsibility to alert TSC if any issues are not adequately addressed by the 192 responsible code owners. 193 194Joining the Static Analysis Audit team 195 196* Contributors highly involved in the project with some expertise 197 in static analysis. 198 199 200.. _release-engineering-team: 201 202Release Engineering Team 203++++++++++++++++++++++++ 204 205A team of active Maintainers involved in multiple areas. 206 207* The members of the Release Engineering team are expected to fill 208 the Release Manager role based on a defined cadence and selection process. 209* The cadence and selection process are defined by the Release Engineering 210 team and are approved by the TSC. 211* The team reports directly into the TSC. 212 213Release Engineering team has the following rights and responsibilities: 214 215* Right to merge code changes to the zephyr tree following the project rules. 216* Right to revert any changes that have broken the code base 217* Right to close any stale changes after <N> months of no activity 218* Responsibility to take directions from the TSC and follow them. 219* Responsibility to coordinate code merges with maintainers. 220* Responsibility to merge all contributions regardless of their 221 origin and area if they have been approved by the respective 222 maintainers and follow the merge criteria of a change. 223* Responsibility to keep the Zephyr code base in a working and passing state 224 (as per CI) 225 226Joining the Release Engineering team 227 228* Maintainers highly involved in the project may be nominated 229 by a TSC voting member to join the Release Engineering team. 230 Nominees may become members of the team by approval of the 231 existing TSC voting members. 232* To ensure a functional Release Engineering team the TSC shall 233 periodically review the team’s followed processes, 234 the appropriate size, and the membership 235 composition (ensure, for example, that team members are 236 geographically distributed across multiple locations and 237 time-zones). 238 239 240Release Manager 241+++++++++++++++ 242 243A *Maintainer* responsible for driving a specific release to 244completion following the milestones and the roadmap of the 245project for this specific release. 246 247* TSC has to approve a release manager. 248 249A Release Manager is a member of the Release Engineering team and has 250the rights and responsibilities of that team in addition to 251the following: 252 253* Right to manage and coordinate all code merges after the 254 code freeze milestone (M3, see `program management overview <https://wiki.zephyrproject.org/Program-Management>`_.) 255* Responsibility to drive and coordinate the triaging process 256 for the release 257* Responsibility to create the release notes of the release 258* Responsibility to notify all stakeholders of the project, 259 including the community at large about the status of the 260 release in a timely manner. 261* Responsibility to coordinate with QA and validation and 262 verify changes either directly or through QA before major 263 changes and major milestones. 264 265Roles / Permissions 266+++++++++++++++++++ 267 268.. table:: Project Roles vs GitHub Permissions 269 :widths: 20 20 10 10 10 10 10 270 :align: center 271 272 ================ =================== =========== ================ =========== =========== ============ 273 .. .. **Admin** **Merge Rights** Member Owner Collaborator 274 ---------------- ------------------- ----------- ---------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ 275 Main Roles Contributor x 276 ---------------- ------------------- ----------- ---------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ 277 .. Collaborator x 278 ---------------- ------------------- ----------- ---------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ 279 .. Maintainer x 280 Supportive Roles QA/Validation x x 281 .. DevOps **x** 282 .. System Admin **x** x 283 .. Release Engineering **x** **x** x 284 285 ================ =================== =========== ================ =========== =========== ============ 286 287 288.. _maintainers_file: 289 290MAINTAINERS File 291################ 292 293Generic guidelines for deciding and filling in the Maintainers' list 294 295* We should keep the granularity of code maintainership at a manageable level 296* We should be looking for maintainers for areas of code that 297 are orphaned (i.e. without an explicit maintainer) 298 299 * Un-maintained areas should be indicated clearly in the MAINTAINERS file 300 301* All submitted pull requests should have an assignee 302* We Introduce an area/subsystem hierarchy to address the above point 303 304 * Parent-area maintainer should be acting as default substitute/fallback 305 assignee for un-maintained sub-areas 306 * Area maintainer gets precedence over parent-area maintainer 307 308* Pull requests may be re-assigned if this is needed or more appropriate 309 310 * Re-assigned by original assignee 311 312* In general, updates to the MAINTAINERS file should be 313 in a standalone commit alongside other changes introducing new files and 314 directories to the tree. 315* Major changes to the file, including the addition of new areas with new maintainers 316 should come in as standalone pull requests and require TSC review. 317* If additional review by the TSC is required, the maintainers of the file 318 should send the requested changes to the TSC and give members of the TSC two 319 (2) days to object to any of the changes to maintainership of areas or the 320 addition of new maintainers or areas. 321* Path, collaborator and name changes do not require a review by the TSC. 322* Addition of new areas without a maintainer do not require review by the TSC. 323* The MAINTAINERS file itself shall have a maintainer 324* Architectures, core components, sub-systems, samples, tests 325 326 * Each area shall have an explicit maintainer 327 328* Boards (incl relevant samples, tests), SoCs (incl DTS) 329 * May have a maintainer, shall have a higher-level platform maintainer 330* Drivers 331 332 * Shall have a driver-area (and API) maintainer 333 * Could have individual driver implementation 334 maintainers but preferably collaborator/contributors 335 * In the above case, platform-specific PRs may be 336 re-assigned to respective collaborator/contributor of driver 337 implementation 338 339 340Release Activity 341################ 342 343 .. figure:: img/img_release_activity.png 344 :width: 663px 345 :align: center 346 :alt: Release Activity 347 348.. _merge_criteria: 349 350Merge Criteria 351++++++++++++++ 352 353* Minimal of 2 approvals, including an approval by the designated assignee. 354* Pull requests should be reviewed by at least a maintainer or collaborator of 355 each affected area; Unless the changes to a given area are considered trivial 356 enough, in which case approvals by other affected subsystems 357 maintainers/collaborators would suffice. 358* Four eye principle on the organisation level. We already require at least 2 359 approvals (basic four eye principle), however, such reviews and approvals 360 might be unintentionally biased in the case where the submitter is from the 361 same organisation as the approvers. To allow for project wide review and 362 approvals, the merge criteria is extended with the guidelines below: 363 364 * Changes or additions to common and shared code shall have approvals from 365 different organisations (at least one approval from an 366 organisation different than the submitters'). 367 Common and shared code is defined as anything that does not fall under 368 :file:`soc`, :file:`boards` and :file:`drivers/*/*`. 369 * Changes or additions to hardware support (driver, SoC, boards) shall at 370 least have the merger be from a different organisation. This applies only 371 to implementation of an API supporting vendor specific hardware and not the 372 APIs. 373 * Release engineers may make exceptions for areas with contributions primarily 374 coming from one organisation and where reviews from other organisations are 375 not possible, however, merges shall be completed by a person from a different 376 organisation. In such cases, the minimum review period of at least 2 days 377 shall be strictly followed to allow for additional reviews. 378 * Release engineers shall not merge code changes originating and reviewed 379 only by their own organisation. To be able to merge such changes, at least 380 one review shall be from a different organisation. 381 382* A minimum review period of 2 business days, 4 hours for trivial changes (see 383 :ref:`review_time`). 384* Hotfixes can be merged at any time after CI has passed and are excluded from 385 most of the conditions listed above. 386* All required checks are passing: 387 388 * Device Tree 389 * Documentation 390 * Code linters (Gitlint, Pylint, Ruff, Sphinx, etc.) 391 * Identity/Emails 392 * Kconfig 393 * License checks 394 * Checkpatch (Coding Style) 395 * Integration Tests (Via twister) on emulation/simulation platforms 396 * Simulated Bluetooth Tests 397 398* Planned 399 400 * Footprint 401 * Code coverage 402 * Coding Guidelines 403 * Static Analysis (Coverity) 404 * Documentation coverage (APIs) 405