Skip to content

doc: simplify nomination process text #27317

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Closed
Trott wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

doc: simplify nomination process text #27317

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
791945e
doc: simplify nomination process text
Trott Apr 19, 2019
bd055d1
fixup! doc: simplify nomination process text
Trott Apr 21, 2019
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Next Next commit
doc: simplify nomination process text 
In GOVERNANCE.md, simplify the text describing Collaborator nominations.
  • Loading branch information
@Trott
Trott committed Apr 19, 2019
commit 791945eb7da274dbfb2928aa29f79e6d8f5db614
9 changes: 3 additions & 6 deletions GOVERNANCE.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -136,12 +136,9 @@ Provide a summary of the nominee's contributions. For example:
Mention @nodejs/collaborators in the issue to notify other Collaborators about
the nomination.

If there are no objections raised by any Collaborators one week after
the issue is opened, the nomination will be considered as accepted.
Should there be any objections against the nomination, the TSC is responsible
for working with the individuals involved and finding a resolution.
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
Copy Markdown
Member

@joyeecheung joyeecheung Apr 20, 2019 •
edited
Loading

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
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@Trott Trott Apr 21, 2019

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!

Otherwise, the nomination fails.

Prior to the public nomination, the Collaborator initiating it can seek
feedback from other Collaborators in private using
Expand Down