doc: remove TSC agenda requirement for nominations

[Trott]

Remove the requirement that Collaborator nominations be announced in TSC
meetings.

Checklist

• documentation is changed or added
• commit message follows commit guidelines

[Trott]

Lite CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request-lite/268/

[ChALkeR]

@Trott, for background — what was the original reason behind having that requirement?

[Trott]

@Trott, for background — what was the original reason behind having that requirement?

I'm guessing a combination of ensuring TSC awareness and following tradition. /ping @joyeecheung

[joyeecheung]

@ChALkeR @Trott
The original idea came from #18090 (comment) by @mcollina

e. I think we should have a fixed session on the TSC meeting to nominate people that have been suggested: that should allow a very quick turnaround.

[joyeecheung]

Also, I did not intend for this to be a requirement, just something that we do to recognize the contribution done by the new collaborator.

[mcollina]

I think it should be the other way around. And we just "read the announcement" during the meeting, nothing to discuss really. It's a nice "welcome!" to people that we think have contributed to Node.js significantly.

I won't block this.

[Trott]

I think it should be the other way around.

@mcollina You mean it should be required to be announced at the TSC meeting rather than on the mailing list? I would agree with that. This isn't intended to stop those announcements. It's intended to stop them from being added as agenda items. Maybe I need a different approach here.

[ChALkeR]

@Trott @mcollina Perhaps adding different section, «Nominations», to the meeting template?

To separate technical things that we actually (should) discuss a lot from nomintations which are mostly acknowledgements at the point when they are announced at the meeting (as they have been previosly discussed e.g. at GitHub by that point).

[targos]

They can be in the existing "Announcements" section.

[mhdawson]

I have no objection to this, but tagging the issue with the agenda label, versus somebody having to remember and then manually update the agenda is much easier in my opinion. If we still want them announced in the meeting then I don't see the problem with the current approach. If we don't mind one way or the other or prefer to not mention them, then avoiding tagging makes sense.

[Trott]

I'm going to close this. If the current imperfect-but-working-well-enough system is working well enough for people, I won't break it. :-D