The AsyncAPI Maintainership Program features a two-step contributor application process: the Initial Application Phase and the Final Selection Phase.
Initial Application Phase
During this phase, contributor applications are reviewed collaboratively by program organizers and mentors to ensure alignment with project needs and contributor readiness.
-
General Screening: Program organizers conduct an initial review to filter out applications that fall into the following categories:
- Applications that do not follow the required template
- Submissions that rely heavily or vaguely on AI-generated content
- Applicants with no prior open-source contribution history
- Proposals that are misaligned or unrelated to any project idea
-
Mentor Review: Applications that pass the initial screening are forwarded to the appropriate mentors. Mentors assess each submission based on its alignment with the project’s scope, clarity, feasibility, and the applicant’s relevant experience.
-
Shortlisting Candidates: Based on their evaluations, mentors can submit a shortlist of up to three preferred contributors per project to the program organizers for final consideration in the next phase (contribution period).
Final Application Phase
This phase serves as the final review stage, where mentors evaluate contributors who have advanced to the contribution period. The goal is to assess each contributor’s performance and suitability for the main program phase.
- If a mentor has multiple contributors, this phase helps determine which applicant is best suited to continue in the program.
- If a mentor has only one contributor, this phase acts as a final checkpoint to decide whether the contributor meets the expectations to proceed.
Mentors will assess the following criteria during the final application review:
-
Communication:
Contributors are evaluated on their responsiveness, clarity, and professionalism in communication throughout the contribution phase. -
Project Understanding:
Mentors assess how well contributors understood the project’s goals and requirements, as demonstrated through their questions, discussions, and submitted work. -
Quality of Contributions:
The relevance, completeness, and quality of contributions such as PRs, documentation, or research will be closely reviewed to evaluate the contributor’s technical capability. -
Collaboration & Conduct:
Emphasis is placed on how well contributors interacted with mentors and the community, respecting collaboration norms and the Code of Conduct.
