# Add new developers!

**URL:** <https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/add-new-developers/8669>\
**Category:** Developers\
**Created:** [April 30, 2019, 7:33pm UTC](https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/add-new-developers/8669 "2019-04-30T19:33:17Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 9

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bob\_Carpenter](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/discourse.mc-stan.org/bob_carpenter/32/9230_2.png) [@Bob\_Carpenter](https://discourse.mc-stan.org/u/Bob_Carpenter)\
**Post date:** [August 20, 2019, 9:23pm UTC](https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/add-new-developers/8669/9 "2019-08-20T21:23:41Z")

</div>

> [@seantalts](#):
>
> I think what Bob said sounds good - having had a non-trivial pull request merged and that area’s tech lead vouching for them.

That was just me repeating someone else’s proposal. ’

> [@seantalts](#):
>
> Also, this might be a good time to talk about the differences

We talked before about just letting users use their judgement, which is what most open-source projects do that aren’t run as a dictatorship (benevolent or otherwise). My main worry is that I think it’s going to be hard for us to start vetting and badging people.

> [@syclik](#):
>
> For each repo, it seems like we should start having:
> 
> - tech lead(s)
> - maintainers
> - PR reviewers
> - developers

How’s a maintainer different than a reviewer? In the past we discussed tech leads (still unclear on role), reviewers (permission to review), and developers (GitHub credentials for stan-dev and ability to vote on Stan governance).

> [@syclik](#):
>
> Does the tech lead automatically get invited to the TWG?

There’s a TWG director, but as far as I know, there isn’t a TWG.

Neither the role of the TWG (aside from the director) or the tech leads have been spelled out. The only official word I know of on @seantalts’s position is this:

> [@Sean Talts is Technical Working Group Director](https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/sean-talts-is-technical-working-group-director/7780):
>
> The Stan Governing Body (SGB) is happy to announce that Sean Talts has been selected to be the Technical Working Group Director. This is a paid position (US$50k/year) drawn from the Stan organization funds which are managed by NumFocus. Some context: Last August the Stan Governing Body was created and part of that effort also created a Technical Working Group (TWG): ([Your new governing body](https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/your-new-governing-body/5693)). Bob Carpenter resigned as TWG director because he felt the job wasn’t a good fit for him and he want…

If there’s more than that somewhere, please let me know. That post includes this:

> The director will operate with a set of clear but high level goals from the SGB to be drafted and voted on separately.

but I do not believe the SGB has laid out any goals. If they have, please let me know where to find them. It also includes this on the tech leads:

> - Setting a technical vision and roadmap by acting as the product manager and (re-)negotiating the priorities and technical direction with the TWG leads according to the mission and goals set out by the SGB.
> - Act as final judge interpreting the SGB mandate and stakeholder needs to break ties and settle disputes between tech leads.

I think what this document calls “TWG leads” is what everyone’s caling “tech leads”. As far as I can tell, it doesn’t lay out any responsibilities or authority for these tech leads nor does it indicate how disputes will be settled.

There’s nothing in there I see defining the TWG itself.

I also think this needs to be clarified:

> - Last-resort, rarely used veto power over any technical decision affecting the `stan-dev` github projects.

It seems to imply someone other than the TWG director at some point is making technical decisions that can be vetoed.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/add-new-developers/8669)._