1. Contributing to OpenMC¶
Thank you for considering contributing to OpenMC! We look forward to welcoming new members to the community and will do our best to help you get up to speed. The purpose of this section is to document how the project is managed: how contributions (bug fixes, enhancements, new features) are made, how they are evaluated, who is permitted to merge pull requests, and what happens in the event of disagreements. Once you have read through this section, the Development Workflow section outlines the actual mechanics of making a contribution (forking, submitting a pull request, etc.).
The goal of our governance model is to:
Encourage new contributions.
Encourage contributors to remain involved.
Avoid unnecessary processes and bureaucracy whenever possible.
Create a transparent decision making process which makes it clear how contributors can be involved in decision making.
OpenMC uses a liberal contribution model for project governance. Anyone involved in development in a non-trivial capacity is given an opportunity to influence the direction of the project. Project decisions are made through a consensus-seeking process rather than by voting.
A Contributor is any individual creating or commenting on an issue or pull request.
A Committer is a subset of contributors who are authorized to review and merge pull requests.
The TC (Technical Committee) is a group of committers who have the authority to make decisions on behalf of the project team in order to resolve disputes.
The Project Lead is a single individual who has the authority to make a final decision when the TC is unable to reach consensus.
1.3. Contribution Process¶
Any change to the OpenMC repository must be made through a pull request (PR). This applies to all changes to documentation, code, binary files, etc. Even long term committers and TC members must use pull requests.
No pull request may be merged without being independently reviewed.
For non-trivial contributions, pull requests should not be merged for at least 36 hours to ensure that contributors in other timezones have time to review. Consideration should be given to weekends and other holiday periods to ensure active committers have reasonable time to become involved in the discussion and review process if they wish. Any committer may request that the review period be extended if they are unable to review the change within 36 hours.
During review, a committer may request that a specific contributor who is most versed in a particular area review the PR before it can be merged.
A pull request can be merged by any committer, but only if no objections are raised by any other committer. In the case of an objection being raised, all involved committers should seek consensus through discussion and compromise.
In the case of an objection being raised in a pull request by another committer, all involved committers should seek to arrive at a consensus by way of addressing concerns being expressed through discussion, compromise on the proposed change, or withdrawal of the proposed change.
If objections to a PR are made and committers cannot reach a consensus on how to proceed, the decision is escalated to the TC. TC members should regularly discuss pending contributions in order to find a resolution. It is expected that only a small minority of issues be brought to the TC for resolution and that discussion and compromise among committers be the default resolution mechanism.
1.4. Becoming a Committer¶
All contributors who make a non-trivial contribution will be added as a committer in a timely manner. Committers are expected to follow this policy.
1.5. TC Process¶
Any issues brought to the TC will be addressed among the committee with a consensus-seeking process. The group tries to find a resolution that has no objections among TC members. If a consensus cannot be reached, the Project Lead has the ultimate authority to make a final decision. It is expected that the majority of decisions made by the TC are via a consensus seeking process and that the Project Lead intercedes only as a last resort.
Resolution may involve returning the issue to committers with suggestions on how to move forward towards a consensus.
Members can be added to the TC at any time. Any committer can nominate another committer to the TC and the TC uses its standard consensus seeking process to evaluate whether or not to add this new member. Members who do not participate consistently at the level of a majority of the other members are expected to resign.
In the event that the Project Lead resigns or otherwise steps down, the TC uses a consensus seeking process to choose a new Project Lead.
1.6. Leadership Team¶
The TC consists of the following individuals:
The Project Lead is Paul Romano.
1.7. Next Steps¶
If you are interested in working on a specific feature or helping to address outstanding issues, consider joining the developer’s mailing list and/or Slack community. Note that some issues have specifically been labeled as good for first-time contributors. Once you’re at the point of writing code, make sure your read through the Development Workflow section to understand the mechanics of making pull requests and what is expected during code reviews.