From 9284df58c1c6af7192f7def7e2903d2b88e250ec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Graham Christensen <graham@grahamc.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 15:44:40 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] maintainers: document new maintainers and team changes

---
 .../reviewing-contributions.chapter.md        | 105 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 105 insertions(+)

diff --git a/doc/contributing/reviewing-contributions.chapter.md b/doc/contributing/reviewing-contributions.chapter.md
index 3417854730ef..4452695a6f38 100644
--- a/doc/contributing/reviewing-contributions.chapter.md
+++ b/doc/contributing/reviewing-contributions.chapter.md
@@ -185,6 +185,111 @@ Sample template for a new module review is provided below.
 ##### Comments
 ```
 
+## Individual maintainer list {#reviewing-contributions-indvidual-maintainer-list}
+
+When adding users to `maintainers/maintainer-list.nix`, the following
+checks should be performed:
+
+-   If the user has specified a GPG key, verify that the commit is
+    signed by their key.
+
+    First, validate that the commit adding the maintainer is signed by
+    the key the maintainer listed. Check out the pull request and
+    compare its signing key with the listed key in the commit.
+
+    If the commit is not signed or it is signed by a different user, ask
+    them to either recommit using that key or to remove their key
+    information.
+
+    Given a maintainter entry like this:
+
+    ``` nix
+    {
+      example = {
+        email = "user@example.com";
+        name = "Example User";
+        keys = [{
+          fingerprint = "0000 0000 2A70 6423 0AED  3C11 F04F 7A19 AAA6 3AFE";
+        }];
+      }
+    };
+    ```
+
+    First receive their key from a keyserver:
+
+        $ gpg --recv-keys 0xF04F7A19AAA63AFE
+        gpg: key 0xF04F7A19AAA63AFE: public key "Example <user@example.com>" imported
+        gpg: Total number processed: 1
+        gpg:               imported: 1
+
+    Then check the commit is signed by that key:
+
+        $ git log --show-signature
+        commit b87862a4f7d32319b1de428adb6cdbdd3a960153
+        gpg: Signature made Wed Mar 12 13:32:24 2003 +0000
+        gpg:                using RSA key 000000002A7064230AED3C11F04F7A19AAA63AFE
+        gpg: Good signature from "Example User <user@example.com>
+        Author: Example User <user@example.com>
+        Date:   Wed Mar 12 13:32:24 2003 +0000
+
+            maintainers: adding example
+
+    and validate that there is a `Good signature` and the printed key
+    matches the user's submitted key.
+
+    Note: GitHub's "Verified" label does not display the user's full key
+    fingerprint, and should not be used for validating the key matches.
+
+-   If the user has specified a `github` account name, ensure they have
+    also specified a `githubId` and verify the two match.
+
+    Maintainer entries that include a `github` field must also include
+    their `githubId`. People can and do change their GitHub name
+    frequently, and the ID is used as the official and stable identity
+    of the maintainer.
+
+    Given a maintainer entry like this:
+
+    ``` nix
+    {
+      example = {
+        email = "user@example.com";
+        name = "Example User";
+        github = "ghost";
+        githubId = 10137;
+      }
+    };
+    ```
+
+    First, make sure that the listed GitHub handle matches the author of
+    the commit.
+
+    Then, visit the URL `https://api.github.com/users/ghost` and
+    validate that the `id` field matches the provided `githubId`.
+
+## Maintainer teams {#reviewing-contributions-maintainer-teams}
+
+Feel free to create a new maintainer team in `maintainers/team-list.nix`
+when a group is collectively responsible for a collection of packages.
+Use taste and personal judgement when deciding if a team is warranted.
+
+Teams are allowed to define their own rules about membership.
+
+For example, some teams will represent a business or other group which
+wants to carefully track its members. Other teams may be very open about
+who can join, and allow anybody to participate.
+
+When reviewing changes to a team, read the team's scope and the context
+around the member list for indications about the team's membership
+policy.
+
+In any case, request reviews from the existing team members. If the team
+lists no specific membership policy, feel free to merge changes to the
+team after giving the existing members a few days to respond.
+
+*Important:* If a team says it is a closed group, do not merge additions
+to the team without an approval by at least one existing member.
+
 ## Other submissions {#reviewing-contributions-other-submissions}
 
 Other type of submissions requires different reviewing steps.