+1
On Oct 22, 2008, at 11:23 AM, John Plocher wrote: > In an attempt to be proactive and clarify what the ARC expects > to happen in the rare situation where a case is submitted, but > nobody actually reviews it, PSARC developed the following > cross-ARC case approval process update. > > Since it started as a potential Sun-internal staffing and > resource issue, this policy was developed as part of "closed > PSARC business". During the last rev of the draft policy, > PSARC took steps to generalize the document so that it could > be openly discussed and become part of the open ARC community. > > By intent, the process seeks to be disruptive in the face of > this failure; the alternative of silently allowing un-reviewed > projects to slip through the cracks is extremely undesirable. > > Very few projects should fall under this process; in an ideal > world, it would never get used. > > Comments and discussion from the OpenSolaris and Sun ARC > Communities are welcome, but note that follow-ups are to > the OpenSolaris arc-discuss list. > > -John > > Todo: > Publish the new quorum/approval process to arc-discuss at os.o > and sac-review > Update the fasttrack handbook to include the specifics noted > below > Update the Licensee handbook to enumerate the sponsor's > new responsibilities > > > > Changes to the ARC Fast Track and Full Review approval process > ============================================================== > > Context: > > What we're trying to get at is the lack of quorum. > We've implicitly decided that fast-tracks can get by > with a reduced quorum, which is where the "+1" > criterion comes from in determining adequacy of > review. But full cases still need a full quorum. > > In response to several recent cases that were submitted, timed > out, and were approved *without* anyone actually looking at the > material, the ARCs have created a new ARC Case Status value, > > "closed denied not reviewed" > > This new status value will be applied to Fast Track and Full > Cases that are submitted and have materials for review, but were > unable to attract the attention of any ARC member to actually > review it. > > This will be measured by the absence of email discussion for a > Fast Track over an explicitly extended review period. Full case > owners are responsible for ensuring a minimum of two members > actually reviewed the case. > > An email/issue that simply affirms "I read the materials and > don't have any issues" satisfies this review intent. > > Cases that are "closed denied not reviewed" can be reopened by > any ARC member who is willing and able to gather the > people-resources needed to actually perform the review. Line > management may need to reconsider staff resource allocations in > order to provide review resources. > > The appeal path is to simply allocate the needed review resources > and reopen the case. > > Unless and until the case is reopened and successfully reviewed, > the "closed denied not reviewed" status is to be treated exactly > like "closed denied" - the project can not integrate. > > > ---------------------------------------- > Fasttrack handbook changes: > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/arc-faq/arc-fasttrack-handbook/ > > 7) The Proposal Is Finalized for the Project and the Case Is Closed > > At the end of the day assigned as the expiration date, the > case sponsor needs to determine whether or not the case was > actually reviewed by any ARC members or if there are any > outstanding issues that would keep the case from being > "closed approved". > > If the Case's timeout expires without any ARC members > submitting email comments (including "+1" affirmations), the > sponsor needs to extend the case timer by 1 week and to work > explicitly with both the project team and the ARC membership > to foster the required review engagement. If, after doing > this, the case times out again, it is "closed denied not > reviewed". > > (If new review resources are found after closing a case this > way, an ARC member who will be reviewing the case reopens it > by setting the case's IAM:Status back to "waiting fast-track > MM/DD/YYY", and performing the usual review: submit > email/issues, discuss during ARC Business, etc, after which > the case is either approved or derailed into a Full Case.) > > Sun Internal note: If no resources can be found/allocated, > the issue of ARC Staffing needs to be brought up at the > appropriate VP and CTO levels. > > If there has been sufficient review activity, and no ARC > member has derailed it, then, once any outstanding issues are > resolved, the sponsor finalizes the proposal for the case by > ensuring that an accurate description of the proposal that > was agreed upon as a result of the email discussion exists in > a single file in the case directory (usually named > "proposal[.txt]"). The sponsor then announces the > finalization and approval of the proposal to the project team > and the ARC via email and officially closes the case by > updating its status (in the case directory) appropriately. > > Note: Once a FastTrack proposal is final, the proposal is > binding on the project, i.e., the project team must not make > significant changes without rerouting the project through the > review process. > >
