Maintainers.md

DSC Resource Kit Maintainers

Maintainers are trusted contributors with knowledge in a resource module domain who have write access to one or more DSC Resource Kit repositories.

Maintainers have the power to:

1. push.
2. Merge pull requests.
3. Assign labels, milestones and people to issues.

Table of Contents

• Current Maintainers
• Rules
• Repeating Tasks
• Issue Workflow
• Pull Request Workflow
  • Abandoned Pull Requests
• Breaking Changes

Current Maintainers

If you should be on this list but are not, please tag @kwirkykat in an issue or send @katiedsc a private message on Twitter.

All repositories without dedicated maintainers are maintained by the current DSC Resource Kit owners, Katie Keim (@kwirkykat) and Mariah Breakey (@mbreakey3).

Repository	Maintainer(s)
AuditPolicyDsc	Adam Haynes (@athaynes)
DscResources	Katie Keim (@kwirkykat)
DscResource.Tests	Katie Keim (@kwirkykat) Mariah Breakey (@mbreakey3)
OfficeOnlineServerDsc	Brian Farnhill (@BrianFarnhill)
PSDscResources	Mariah Breakey (@mbreakey3) Katie Keim (@kwirkykat)
SecurityPolicyDsc	Jason Walker (@jcwalker)
SharePointDsc	Brian Farnhill (@BrianFarnhill)
SystemLocaleDsc	Daniel Scott-Raynsford (@PlagueHO)
xActiveDirectory	Ben Gelens (@bgelens) Raimund Andree (@raandree) Richard Siddaway (@RichardSiddaway)
xAdcsDeployment	Daniel Scott-Raynsford (@PlagueHO)
xAzure	---
xAzurePack	---
xBitlocker	---
xCertificate	Daniel Scott-Raynsford (@PlagueHO)
xChrome	---
xComputerManagement	Tyson Hayes (@tysonjhayes) Ben Gelens (@bgelens) Richard Siddaway (@RichardSiddaway) Daniel Scott-Raynsford (@PlagueHO)
xCredSSP	Ben Gelens (@bgelens)
xDatabase	---
xDFS	Daniel Scott-Raynsford (@PlagueHO)
xDhcpServer	Richard Siddaway (@RichardSiddaway)
xDismFeature	---
xDnsServer	Raimund Andree (@raandree) Richard Siddaway (@RichardSiddaway)
xDscDiagnostics	---
xDSCResourceDesigner	---
xExchange	Mike Hendrickson (@mhendric)
xFailOverCluster	Johan Ljunggren (@johlju) Ben Gelens (@bgelens) Richard Siddaway (@RichardSiddaway)
xFirefox	---
xHyper-V	Ben Gelens (@bgelens) Brian Farnhill (@BrianFarnhill)
xInternetExplorerHomePage	---
xJea	---
xMySql	---
xNetworking	Tyson Hayes (@tysonjhayes) Daniel Scott-Raynsford (@PlagueHO) Ben Gelens (@bgelens) Raimund Andree (@raandree) Richard Siddaway (@RichardSiddaway)
xPendingReboot	---
xPhp	---
xPowerShellExecutionPolicy	---
xPSDesiredStateConfiguration	Mariah Breakey (@mbreakey3) Katie Keim (@kwirkykat)
xRemoteDesktopAdmin	---
xRemoteDesktopSessionHost	Ben Gelens (@bgelens)
xRobocopy	---
xSafeHarbor	---
xSCDPM	---
xSCOM	---
xSCSMA	Ben Gelens (@bgelens)
xSCSPF	---
xSCSR	---
xSCVMM	---
xSmbShare	---
xSqlPs	---
xSQLServer	Johan Ljunggren (@johlju)
xStorage	Daniel Scott-Raynsford (@PlagueHO) Ben Gelens (@bgelens)
xSystemSecurity	---
xTimeZone	---
xWebAdministration	Tyson Hayes (@tysonjhayes) Richard Siddaway (@RichardSiddaway)
xWebDeploy	---
xWindowsEventForwarding	---
xWindowsRestore	---
xWindowsUpdate	---
xWinEventLog	---
xWordPress	---

Rules

If you are maintainer, please follow these rules:

1. DO ensure that each contributor has signed a valid Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

2. DO reply to new issues and pull requests (after you finish reviewing and everything looks good to you, leave a comment like "Looks good to me" or "LGTM" so we know that someone has looked at it and approved it).

3. DO make sure contributors are following the contributor guidelines.

4. DO ask people to resend a pull request, if it targets the wrong branch.

5. DO require people to write Pester tests for all new/changed functionality.

6. DO wait for the CI system build to pass for pull requests.

7. DO encourage contributors to refer to issues in PR title/description (e.g. Closes #11). Edit title if necessary.

8. DO encourage contributors to create meaningful titles for all PRs. Edit title if necessary.

9. DO verify that all contributors are following the style guidelines.

10. DO verify compliance with any third party code license terms (e.g., requiring attribution, etc.) if the contribution contains third party code.

11. DON'T merge pull requests without the label cla-signed or cla-not-required from the Microsoft CLA bot.

12. DON'T merge pull requests to master branch.

13. DON'T merge pull requests with a failed CI build.

14. DON'T merge pull requests that do not include all meaningful changes under the Unreleased section in the repository's README.md.

15. DON'T merge your own pull requests before they are reviewed by someone else.

• If there is no one else to review your pull request, please wait 24 hours to merge it in case anyone comes along and has a comment.

Repeating Tasks

If you are a maintainer these are the repeating tasks that need to be done regularly.

Change copyright information

Each year, before that years first DSC Resource Kit release, the copyright information should be updated with the current year in the modules module manifest (the .psd1 file).

This is how the copyright information looks like for 2017.

# Copyright statement for this module
Copyright = '(c) 2017 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.'

Beginning of year 2018 (and so on) the copyright information should be updated to the current year.

# Copyright statement for this module
Copyright = '(c) 2018 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.'

Issue Workflow

1. Someone creates an issue.
2. A maintainer assigns one of the following labels: bug, enhancement, discussion, question
3. In some cases, other special labels may be used (e.g. module proposal for issues requesting new DSC resource modules in the DscResources repository)
4. If the issue is a duplicate of another issue, the maintainer adds the duplicate label, references the issue this one is a duplicate of, and closes the issue.
5. If the issue is external to your module, the maintainer adds the external label, comments with an explanation of why the issue will not be fixed, and closes the issue.
6. If for some other reason an issue should not be fixed, the maintainer adds the not fixed label, comments with an explanation of why the issue will not be fixed, and closes the issue.
7. A maintainer assigns the help wanted label to let contributors know this issue needs someone else to look at it
8. Once a contributor volunteers to work on the issue, the maintainer removes the help wanted label, adds the in progress label, and assigns the issue to the volunteer.
9. Once issue is fixed, the maintainer removes the in progress label and closes the issue.

Pull Request Workflow

1. A contributor opens a pull request.
2. The contributor ensures that their pull request passes the CI system build.

• If the build fails, a maintainer adds the waiting for author label to the pull request. The contributor can then continue to update the pull request until the build passes.

2. Once the build passes, the maintainer either reviews the pull request immediately or adds the needs review label.
3. A maintainer or trusted contributor reviews the pull request code.

• If the contributor does not meet the reviewer's standards, the reviewer makes comments. A maintainer then removes the the needs review label and adds the waiting for author label. The contributor must address the comments and repeat from step 2.
• If the contributor meets the reviewer's standards, the reviewer comments that they are satisfied. A maintainer then removes the the needs review label.

3. Once the code review is completed, a maintainer merges the pull request.

Abandoned Pull Requests

A pull request with the label waiting for the author for more than 2 weeks without word from the author is considered abandoned.

In these cases:

1. Ping the author of PR to remind him of pending changes.

• If the contributor responds, it's no longer an abandoned pull request, proceed as normal.

2. If the contributor does not respond within a week:

• If the reviewer's comments are very minor, merge the change, fix the code immediately, and create a new PR with the fixes addressing the minor comments.
• If the changes required to merge the pull request are significant but needed, create a new branch with the changes and open an issue to merge the code into the dev branch. Mention the original pull request ID in the description of the new issue and close the abandoned pull request.
• If the changes in an abandoned pull request are no longer needed (e.g. due to refactoring of the codebase or a design change), simply close the pull request.

Breaking Changes

Breaking changes may be accepted if they make a resource better. Breaking changes usually include:

• Adding a new mandatory parameter
• Changing an existing parameter
• Removing an existing parameter
• Fundamentally changing an existing functionality of a resource

If you need to accept a breaking change in your module please please ensure:

1. Any issues or PRs associated with the breaking change include the breaking change label.
2. At least one of the bullet points in the updated release notes starts with 'BREAKING CHANGE:'.
3. The title of the PR that includes the breaking change starts with 'BREAKING CHANGE:'.

Upon release, the version of a module with a breaking change will be updated as such:

• Modules that still have the x... naming are incremented by a full version number if there is a breaking change (2.2.0.0 --> 3.0.0.0). All of these modules are still considered to be in the 'preview' or 'experimental' phase.
• Modules that have the ...Dsc naming but are still in the 'preview' phase (prior to 1.0.0.0) are incremented only by a sub-version regardless of breaking changes until they are ready to come out of preview (0.3.0.0 --> 0.4.0.0).
• Modules that have the ...Dsc naming and are out of the 'preview' phase (1.0.0.0 and after) are incremented by a full version number (2.2.0.0 --> 3.0.0.0).