-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21.5k
docs: update TC governance rules #5483
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
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -107,7 +107,22 @@ move forward towards a consensus. It is not expected that a meeting of the TC | |
| will resolve all issues on its agenda during that meeting and may prefer to continue | ||
| the discussion happening among the committers. | ||
|
|
||
| Members can be added to the TC at any time. Any committer can nominate another committer | ||
| Members can be added to the TC at any time. Any TC member can nominate another committer | ||
| to the TC and the TC uses its standard consensus seeking process to evaluate whether or | ||
| not to add this new member. Members who do not participate consistently at the level of | ||
| a majority of the other members are expected to resign. | ||
| not to add this new member. The TC will consist of a minimum of 3 active members and a | ||
| maximum of 10. If the TC should drop below 5 members the active TC members should nominate | ||
| someone new. If a TC member is stepping down, they are encouraged (but not required) to | ||
| nominate someone to take their place. | ||
|
|
||
| TC members will be added as admin's on the Github orgs, npm orgs, and other resources as | ||
| necessary to be effective in the role. | ||
|
|
||
| To remain "active" a TC member should have participation within the last 6 months and miss | ||
| no more than three consecutive TC meetings. Members who do not meet this are expected to step down. | ||
| If A TC member does not step down, an issue can be opened in the discussions repo to move them | ||
| to inactive status. TC members who step down or are removed due to inactivity will be moved | ||
| into inactive status. | ||
|
|
||
| Inactive status members can become active members by self nomination if the TC is not already | ||
| larger than the maximum of 10. They will also be given preference if, while at max size, an | ||
| active member steps down. | ||
|
Comment on lines
+126
to
+128
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Late to the comment party, but the lawyer in me (disclaimer: definitely not a lawyer) thinks this verbiage should be removed. I don't see how it adds any real value. I'm imagining a case where a TC member is [involuntarily] removed due to inactivity, but disagrees with the decision. This verbiage would allow them to "self-nominate" and demand they be given preference over other, possibly more desirable candidates. If a candidate previously served on the TC, the active TC can (and I'm sure will) consider that experience appropriately. There's no need to codify it as part of the governance rules.
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No worries, we figured this might need more edits after.
Yeah that was sort of the intent I was thinking of, but I totally see your point. I am not sure which is more important:
I agree though, not having these words in the governance gives more freedom for interpretation. Would love to hear others thoughts on it. |
||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.