Browse files

doc: remove confusing reference in governance doc

At the CTC meeting today, Sakthipriyan noted that there was a link to
the CTC consensus material from the pull request consensus material. The
link was confusing because the CTC consensus material is
meeting-specific, which does not apply to pull requests. I have removed
that link and replaced it with a text explanation.

PR-URL: #9073
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <>
Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <>
  • Loading branch information...
Trott authored and jasnell committed Oct 13, 2016
1 parent bb1e606 commit 38cf1d473955673563ce4212e8361bbd705320c1
Showing with 11 additions and 4 deletions.
  1. +11 −4
@@ -36,10 +36,17 @@ Collaborators. All pull requests must be reviewed and accepted by a
Collaborator with sufficient expertise who is able to take full
responsibility for the change. In the case of pull requests proposed
by an existing Collaborator, an additional Collaborator is required
for sign-off. Consensus should be sought if additional Collaborators
participate and there is disagreement around a particular
modification. See [Consensus Seeking Process](#consensus-seeking-process) below
for further detail on the consensus model used for governance.
for sign-off.
If one or more Collaborators oppose a proposed change, then the change can not
be accepted unless:
* Discussions and/or additional changes result in no Collaborators objecting to
the change. Previously-objecting Collaborators do not necessarily have to
sign-off on the change, but they should not be opposed to it.
* The change is escalated to the CTC and the CTC votes to approve the change.
This should be used only after other options (especially discussion among
the disagreeing Collaborators) have been exhausted.
Collaborators may opt to elevate significant or controversial modifications to
the CTC by assigning the `ctc-review` label to a pull request or issue. The

0 comments on commit 38cf1d4

Please sign in to comment.