From b4e24e3c96ef404815cb232f4e3e7b87629477a1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rich Trott Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 19:49:22 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] doc: remove tsc-review MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The tsc-review label is ineffective. It almost always gets ignored. Remove it. When requiring TSC attention, people should @-mention the TSC GitHub team. PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/26506 Reviewed-By: Daniel Bevenius Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater --- COLLABORATOR_GUIDE.md | 6 ++---- GOVERNANCE.md | 12 +++--------- doc/onboarding.md | 2 -- 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/COLLABORATOR_GUIDE.md b/COLLABORATOR_GUIDE.md index a14aaaa04988fc..5f25ca0ff365fc 100644 --- a/COLLABORATOR_GUIDE.md +++ b/COLLABORATOR_GUIDE.md @@ -305,7 +305,6 @@ in the placeholder's `README`. For pull requests introducing new core modules: * Allow at least one week for review. -* Label with the `tsc-review` label. * Land only after sign-off from at least two TSC members. * Land with a [Stability Index][] of Experimental. The module must remain Experimental until a semver-major release. @@ -381,9 +380,8 @@ Do this if a pull request or issue: - is controversial, or - is at an impasse among Collaborators who are participating in the discussion. -Assign the `tsc-review` label or @-mention the -`@nodejs/tsc` GitHub team if you want to elevate an issue to the [TSC][]. -Do not use the GitHub UI on the right-hand side to assign to +@-mention the `@nodejs/tsc` GitHub team if you want to elevate an issue to the +[TSC][]. Do not use the GitHub UI on the right-hand side to assign to `@nodejs/tsc` or request a review from `@nodejs/tsc`. The TSC should serve as the final arbiter where required. diff --git a/GOVERNANCE.md b/GOVERNANCE.md index d92d3c821e85b3..11499b4c7814a1 100644 --- a/GOVERNANCE.md +++ b/GOVERNANCE.md @@ -50,10 +50,6 @@ be accepted unless: This should only happen if disagreements between Collaborators cannot be resolved through discussion. -Collaborators may opt to elevate significant or controversial modifications to -the TSC by assigning the `tsc-review` label to a pull request or issue. The -TSC should serve as the final arbiter where required. - See: * [Current list of Collaborators](./README.md#current-project-team-members) @@ -105,11 +101,9 @@ The intention of the agenda is not to approve or review all patches. That should happen continuously on GitHub and be handled by the larger group of Collaborators. -Any community member or contributor can ask that something be reviewed -by the TSC by logging a GitHub issue. Any Collaborator, TSC member, or the -meeting chair can bring the issue to the TSC's attention by applying the -`tsc-review` label. If consensus-seeking among TSC members fails for a -particular issue, it may be added to the TSC meeting agenda by adding the +Any community member or contributor can ask that something be reviewed by the +TSC by logging a GitHub issue. If consensus-seeking among TSC members fails for +a particular issue, it may be added to the TSC meeting agenda by adding the `tsc-agenda` label. Prior to each TSC meeting, the meeting chair will share the agenda with diff --git a/doc/onboarding.md b/doc/onboarding.md index 5938803e531c95..b8b6ee62337dfa 100644 --- a/doc/onboarding.md +++ b/doc/onboarding.md @@ -89,8 +89,6 @@ onboarding session. so that we know what parts of the code base the pull request modifies. It is not perfect, of course. Feel free to apply relevant labels and remove irrelevant labels from pull requests and issues. - * Use the `tsc-review` label if a topic is controversial or isn't coming to a - conclusion after an extended time. * `semver-{minor,major}`: * If a change has the remote *chance* of breaking something, use the `semver-major` label