Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

doc: simplify nomination process text #27317

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@Trott
Copy link
Member

commented Apr 19, 2019

In GOVERNANCE.md, simplify the text describing Collaborator nominations.

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
doc: simplify nomination process text
In GOVERNANCE.md, simplify the text describing Collaborator nominations.
@nodejs-github-bot

This comment has been minimized.

The nomination must be approved by the TSC, which is assumed when there are no
objections from any TSC members.
The nomination passes if no Collaborators oppose it after one week. If a
Collaborator opposes the nomination, the TSC may still choose to approve it.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@joyeecheung

joyeecheung Apr 20, 2019

Member

Not that this has happened before, but I don't think the TSC usually insists on approving a nomination even though there is objection (or it should) , so this somewhat changes the actual meaning of the passage?

What I have in mind when I read this is more like:

If a Collaborator opposes the nomination, the TSC must try to resolve the disagreement.
If the disagreement cannot be resolved within <insert time>, the nomination fails.

The difference is that the resolution process does not exclude non-TSC collaborators (or the nominee).

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@Trott

Trott Apr 21, 2019

Author Member

I definitely see what you're saying, @joyeecheung. My intention was to remove the whole thing about the TSC being responsible for facilitating anything. While the TSC could choose to do that, I'm not sure it is terribly relevant or accurate to say that they are responsible for it. Moreover, such actions are far more likely to be taken by individual TSC members independently than by the TSC as a whole. Lastly, as you point out, this has literally never come up.

The whole "TSC can override the objection" thing wasn't supposed to be new material, but I see that I was reading too much into the text. So I've removed it. PTAL!

@Trott

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Apr 21, 2019

@benjamingr I've removed one significant sentence since your approval. Might be a good idea to check again to make sure your approval still stands?

@Trott

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Apr 21, 2019

@Trott Trott added the author ready label Apr 22, 2019

@Trott

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Apr 22, 2019

Landed in 72308a5

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.