Glossary definition of Project Maintainer overstates the terms usage in CNCF

[lizrice]

Under "Project Maintainer" the text says

In CNCF, term “maintainer” is used over other similar terms such as “committer”.

This simply not true - both terms are used more-or-less interchangeably. For example the Charter uses the term "committer". Some projects use "maintainer" and others use "committer".

(I suspect that terms like "contributor", "community member" and others may also have project-specific usage.

[aliok]

Thanks for the feedback @lizrice

In CNCF, term “maintainer” is used over other similar terms such as “committer”.

We can simply remove that sentence. Later on, once there's an outcome from the discussion in that TOC ticket, we can update our definitions.

[craigbox]

See also cncf/foundation#433

(Who processes that queue, and can I ask them why that issue hasn't had any response in almost a year?)

[jberkus]

The terms are used interchangeably and that is a problem because they do not mean the same thing. Maintainer means something; committer does not. Disagree with the change.

[craigbox]

The section in question is https://contribute.cncf.io/resources/glossary/#project-maintainer (I had to look it up.)

I think I see the problem.

A project maintainer is an individual or a group responsible for managing and overseeing the development, coordination, and overall health of an open source project. Maintainers review contributions, make decisions, and guide the project’s direction. In CNCF, term “maintainer” is used over other similar terms such as “committer”.

In my head, committers, as "people who can change the code", are the people who most commonly review the contributions that other people (other committers or drive-by contributors) make. Maintainers are a group above that on the ladder, who do all the rest of the things that are specified.

CNCF does not correctly understand that distinction. Can someone please look at cncf/foundation#433 ?

[jberkus]

The term "committers" means something different in the world of git, today. Everyone who has a merged change is a committer. This is what Devstats displays when you filter on "committers"; it's everyone who contributed to a PR. It's not a leadership position.

This is why the CNCF staff refers to maintainers everywhere, and doesn't talk to committers.

As such, the CNCF as an organization should NOT be using the term committer to refer to project leaders of any kind. It's misleading and confusing for engineers. Nobody I've seen arguing to use the term committer has been an engineer.

[craigbox]

I don't want to keep the term. I want to keep a clear definition between "project leaders" and "people who can accept code", and I want the same word used throughout. I have no attachment to any particular words.

[jberkus]

The reason I'm focusing on the term "maintainer" is that it's already used to signify project leaders in many places in the CNCF, for example: https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/main/project-maintainers.csv .

If we use Maintainer for "project leaders as recognized by the CNCF", that leaves Approver, Owner, Committer, or whatever that projects can use for their own "can merge code but not a leader" category, if they need one.