Skip to content

Conversation

@wuhuizuo
Copy link
Contributor

@wuhuizuo wuhuizuo commented Sep 26, 2025

This pull request updates the TiDB team membership configuration to reflect current roles and responsibilities. The main changes involve moving several contributors between the maintainers, committers, and reviewers lists in the teams/tidb/membership.json file due to reasons such as resignation, job changes, etc. Ensuring that team permissions are up to date to better control the integration quality of the repository's code.

Membership updates:

  • Several individuals were remove from the maintainers and committers to the reviewers list, reflecting a reorganization of team roles. [1] [2]

@wuhuizuo wuhuizuo requested a review from a team as a code owner September 26, 2025 03:56
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Sep 26, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign tiancaiamao for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.
Please ensure that each of them provides their approval before proceeding.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot requested a review from qiuyesuifeng September 26, 2025 03:56
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Sep 26, 2025
@wuhuizuo
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 26, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@lance6716 lance6716 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I didn't find how these roles are related to PingCAP company. And

Membership of the maintainers can be revoked by a consensus vote of all the maintainers other than the member in question.

this is a hard work

https://github.com/pingcap/community/tree/master/teams#roles-and-responsibilities

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Sep 26, 2025

[LGTM Timeline notifier]

Timeline:

  • 2025-09-26 14:18:31.930674567 +0000 UTC m=+625522.001168250: ✖️🔁 reset by lance6716.

@lance6716
Copy link
Contributor

If you are concerned about the code security in the company's software repository, the code owner mechanism should be sufficient to ensure that company employees who are more familiar with the development context can review the code. This community PR is unnecessary.

"b41sh",
"cbcwestwolf",
"chrysan",
"crazycs520",

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

seriously?

@bb7133
Copy link
Member

bb7133 commented Sep 26, 2025

resignation, job changes

We do not nominate reviewers/committers because "they have some jobs".

I think it's better to add the 'inactive roles' when those reviewers/committers do not participate in TiDB community for a long time.

@winkyao
Copy link
Contributor

winkyao commented Sep 27, 2025

According to the governance rules of teams: https://github.com/pingcap/community/tree/master/teams.

If you want to remove a maintainer, please initiate a vote. Moreover, since this time involves many people being changed, I request initiating a ToC vote for discussion and decision-making.

@wuhuizuo wuhuizuo marked this pull request as draft September 28, 2025 03:17
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Sep 28, 2025
@wuhuizuo
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign Benjamin2037

@zanmato1984
Copy link
Contributor

This doesn’t seem like a proper community initiative, as long as we are still a community. Retiring committers or maintainers should go through a voting process, not just a random PR.

If the concern is about code privileges, we should investigate what went wrong with the current privilege management mechanism and fix it, rather than banning someone for making so-called “trouble”.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants