doc: revise TSC Meetings material in GOVERNANCE.md #27204
Conversation
Make the TSC Meetings section in GOVERNANCE.md simpler and shorter.
nodejs-github-bot
added
the
meta
|
R: @nodejs/tsc |
GOVERNANCE.md
Outdated
| Items are added to the TSC agenda which are considered contentious or | ||
| are modifications of governance, contribution policy, TSC membership, | ||
| or release process. | ||
| The TSC agenda consists only of issues that are at an impasse. The intention of |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change now excludes things like #26186 which was an example of modifications of TSC membership. Given that voting for approving TSC members happens in the TSC meetings it kind of makes sense for those issues to be added to the agenda.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given that voting for approving TSC members happens in the TSC meetings it kind of makes sense for those issues to be added to the agenda.
I'm OK with adding it back if that's the consensus, but IIUC, the only reason that stuff was in the agenda was because this doc (and maybe others?) said or implied that it had to happen in a meeting. I suspect current TSC consensus would be that there's no reason for the vote to have to happen in a meeting. It can (and, IMO, should) happen in a GitHub issue. The new member can be announced/celebrated during the announcements portion of the meeting.
Voting during meetings is suboptimal and should be avoided IMO because it means only people who can attend that particular meeting get to vote. For membership votes (and some others), we subverted that by gathering votes ahead of time. But the gathering of votes ahead of time, especially for a non-controversial nomination, would seem to argue that the vote doesn't need to happen in the meeting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll defer to @nodejs/tsc if this covers everything that should be on the agenda. Looking at the recent agenda I see tracking issues and things related to the merger of the foundations which all appear to be for informational/discussion purposes and are not things at an impasse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think its quite right to say the agenda only consists of things that are at impasse. An update for the board and the strategic initiatives don't fall under that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The tracking issues are things I have argued should be part of the meeting template (like Announcements) and not individual agenda items. If this lands, I'll open a PR against the meeting agenda generator to make that so.
IMO, the informational things are OK if they are not getting sufficient attention. Perhaps rather than "impasse", it should say something about being stalled due to disagreement or lack of attention? Or maybe "impasse" covers it sufficiently, if somewhat imprecisely?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@richardlau @mhdawson I changed the text to be less rigid: "The TSC agenda includes issues that are at an impasse." That way, it doesn't exclude anything, but also doesn't list out every type of thing that can end up on the agenda. Let me know if that doesn't sufficiently address your concerns. Thanks!
Make the TSC Meetings section in GOVERNANCE.md simpler and shorter. PR-URL: nodejs#27204 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com>
|
Landed in 82e6c33 |
Make the TSC Meetings section in GOVERNANCE.md simpler and shorter.
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passes