Open Review: Changes to the ARC Fast Track and Full Review approval process

[Lloyd Chambers]

+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.
>
>