chore: add 2026 community goals #2112
Conversation
thulieblack
requested review from
asyncapi-bot-eve,
bandantonio and
derberg
as code owners
WalkthroughAdds a new documentation file Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
docs/030-project-vision-strategy-goals/2026_Community_Goals.md(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
docs/030-project-vision-strategy-goals/2026_Community_Goals.md (2)
25-25: Verify "AsyncAPU" in S5.This appears to be a typo. Did you mean "AsyncAPI Bounty Program" instead of "AsyncAPU Bounty Program"?
-- **S5: The AsyncAPU Bounty Program** (Targets O1): Establish a budget schedule for the Bounty Program and improve efficiency. +- **S5: The AsyncAPI Bounty Program** (Targets O1): Establish a budget schedule for the Bounty Program and improve efficiency.
1-46: Overall structure and content are well-organized.The GOSM framework is clearly applied, objectives are measurable, and strategies are well-articulated with explicit target mappings. The summary effectively assigns clear ownership and execution structure. Once the critical issues above are resolved, this document will provide excellent strategic direction for the community in 2026.
|
@asyncapi/governance-board, please review. Also, should we start pinging the TSC? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
♻️ Duplicate comments (2)
docs/030-project-vision-strategy-goals/2026_Community_Goals.md (2)
21-21: Restore spacing before S1 and avoid hardcoding repo count.Regression: missing space after dash; also “49” will stale. Suggest:
-**S1: Repository Audit & Consolidation** (Targets O1, O2): Conduct a clear audit of all 49 repositories to identify active maintainers, consolidate inactive repos, and identify critical ones. Move inactive maintainers to an Emeritus role. +- **S1: Repository Audit & Consolidation** (Targets O1, O2): Conduct a clear audit of all repositories (currently 49) to identify active maintainers, consolidate inactive repos, and identify critical ones. Move inactive maintainers to an Emeritus role.
16-16: Replace the O1 placeholder with a concrete target.The bracketed placeholder must be resolved before merge. Example:
-**O1**: Increase the number of maintainers from 70 to [number we come up with here] by the end of 2026. +**O1**: Increase the number of maintainers from 70 to [TARGET_NUMBER] by the end of 2026.
🧹 Nitpick comments (9)
docs/030-project-vision-strategy-goals/2026_Community_Goals.md (9)
2-2: Fix title wording (duplication + pluralize).Current title repeats “Goals” and uses singular “Strategy”. Suggest:
-title: "Community Goals, Objectives, Strategy, and Measures Goals for 2026" +title: "Community Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Measures for 2026"
17-17: Clarify action and criteria for inactive repositories.“Remove all the inactive repositories” is risky and undefined. Suggest defining inactivity and using archive/consolidate:
-**O2**: Remove all the inactive repositories by Q2 2026. +**O2**: By Q2 2026, archive or consolidate repositories that meet a published “inactive” criterion (e.g., no releases/commits/issues activity for N months), and document outcomes.
18-18: Align O3 with effectiveness, not just quantity.Create-or-revitalize with activity criteria to avoid a vanity metric:
-**O3**: Improve the effectiveness of working groups by establishing two new active groups by the end of Q3 2026. +**O3**: Improve working‑group effectiveness by establishing or revitalizing at least two active groups by the end of Q3 2026, measured against published activity criteria (e.g., regular meetings, notes, chairs, quarterly updates).
24-24: Disambiguate program naming in S4.Pick the correct program name (or list both explicitly) to avoid confusion:
-**S4: Enhance the Maintainership Program** (Targets O1): Pause the in-house Mentorship/Maintainership program in 2026. Improve coordination with GSoC and explore LFX Mentorship. Establish a dedicated Maintainership Working Group to improve all aspects of the program. +**S4: Enhance the Maintainership Program** (Targets O1): Pause the in‑house Mentorship program in 2026. Improve coordination with GSoC and explore LFX Mentorship. Establish a dedicated Maintainership Working Group to improve all aspects of the program.
26-26: Tighten wording in S6.“have the meet-ups section” reads awkwardly:
-**S6: Organize the AsyncAPI Conference 2026** (Targets O1): Improve venue selection, have the meet-ups section, continue with the work on the API Standards Booth, and improve the conference prospectus for sponsors. +**S6: Organize the AsyncAPI Conference 2026** (Targets O1): Improve venue selection, include a meetups track, continue work on the API Standards Booth, and improve the conference prospectus for sponsors.
32-32: Make heading style consistent.Remove the trailing colon to match other headings:
-### Measures: +### Measures
33-43: Define “active”/“inactive” to keep measures meaningful.Add brief operational definitions (e.g., “active maintainer” = N PRs reviewed/merged or meeting attendance; “active WG” = monthly meetings + notes + chairs) to prevent Goodharting and ease tracking. Consider a short “Definitions” subsection here.
41-41: Add missing period to M9.-- **M9**: Number of sponsors +- **M9**: Number of sponsors.
44-46: Include qualitative indicators per Issue #2085.Add a brief “Qualitative indicators” list (e.g., reduced maintainer burnout signals, faster decision cycles, smoother onboarding, more people stepping up as DRIs). This aligns the doc with the linked issue’s requirement.
derberg
left a comment
derberg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
great work!
few comments from my side
|
Hi @asyncapi/tsc_members and @asyncapi/ambassadors, we have the proposal for Community Goals. Please review and share your insights or questions by November 21st. |
|
🚀 Docs preview deployed |
|
🚀 Docs preview deployed |
|
🚀 Docs preview deployed |
|
🚀 Docs preview deployed |
|
🚀 Docs preview deployed |
|
🚀 Docs preview deployed |
7 participants
The PR outlines all the community activities and goals that we will focus on in the coming year of 2026.
Let the discussion/review begin!!!!
resolves #2085
Summary by CodeRabbit
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.