Require TSC approval for stances

[benjamingr]

@nodejs/tsc , bikeshedding/different wording welcome

Description

Validation

Related Issues

Check List

• I have read the Contributing Guidelines and made commit messages that follow the guideline.
• I have run npm run format to ensure the code follows the style guide.
• I have run npm run test to check if all tests are passing.
• I have run npx turbo build to check if the website builds without errors.
• I've covered new added functionality with unit tests if necessary.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
nodejs-org	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Jun 3, 2024 8:58am

[ovflowd]

For all it's worth, I appreciate the TSC proactively handling this.

[mcollina]

lgtm

[bmuenzenmeyer]

Does anyone have strong opinions about how this relates to CONTENT VS CODE?

I think if I had to pick, I'd see it as content. Reading those guidelines in accordance with this change, I'd resolve to say it re-enforces TSC involvement. Perhaps they should be cross-linked.

[ovflowd]

Does anyone have strong opinions about how this relates to CONTENT VS CODE?

I think if I had to pick, I'd see it as content. Reading those guidelines in accordance with this change, I'd resolve to say it re-enforces TSC involvement. Perhaps they should be cross-linked.

cc @nodejs/tsc

[ovflowd]

Standard governance changes within this repository require an extended period for approval. But I can't imagine the TSC or the Web Team would be against this change. To be honest, we can merge this as soon as possible. But I'm also fine waiting the 72 hours.

I'd like @bmuenzenmeyer's concern addressed before we merge this, just so we can easily clarify/connect both documents, which serve as a guiding mechanism.

Is the TSC OK if we update the docs of CONTENT_VS_CODE to match governance changes?

[benjamingr]

. Standard governance changes within this repository require an extended period for approval. But I can't imagine the TSC or the Web Team would be against this change. To be honest, we can merge this as soon as possible. But I'm also fine waiting the 72 hours.

Please do not merge this until 48h have passed or at least TSC members have had time to look when back from the weekend.

[jasnell]

I think it should likely be stressed that this is not a gatekeeping measure meant to discourage these kinds of changes but more of an awareness thing. Specifically, the TSC needs to be given the time to be aware that such changes are proposed/pending and given the time to weigh in on the possible ramifications of the change.

[benjamingr]

@jasnell I've tried to use as neutral objective language in the text but feel free to suggest edits if you think it implies a bias against or for such initiatives.

[avivkeller]

IMO a variant of this should be added to https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md#technical-steering-committee and https://github.com/nodejs/TSC#list-of-tsc-responsibilities

[mhdawson]

LGTM

[jasnell]

I'm not suggesting that any changes be made to the proposed text (otherwise I would have made that explicit)... I just wanted to stress the point in the PR discussion here.

[bmuenzenmeyer]

48 hours have passed. appreciate the strong alignment on this one