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

Trott
Copy link
Member

@Trott Trott 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

In GOVERNANCE.md, simplify the text describing Collaborator nominations.
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. label Apr 19, 2019
GOVERNANCE.md Outdated
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.
Copy link
Member

@joyeecheung joyeecheung Apr 20, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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).

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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
Copy link
Member Author

Trott 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
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Apr 21, 2019

@Trott Trott added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Apr 22, 2019
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott 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
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants