Governance document #456
Governance document #456
Conversation
…k to discussion while the document is being drafted
…estions. Out-of-scope only has a suggestion to be left blank.
Add that quorum is required for a vote by default.
…of the consensus process
Use full "Any Decision Record" naming for ADR Co-authored-by: Greg Dennis <[email protected]>
No one suggests linting isn't critical.
…o governance document
Co-authored-by: Tobie Langel <[email protected]>
…am specs and projects
… small modification. With thanks for guidance from Julian
… back into charter document. Specifically around decision making and voting. With thanks to Julian for assisting in this revision.
Co-authored-by: Jason Desrosiers <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have been thinking lately about this and I do think that we should add a clause to limit the number of members of the TSC working for the same employer to make sure there is balance and equity in all decisions and also to make sure there is a positive external perception of all decision.
It is true that we are a small group, however I do think this is the right time to adopt an approach like this.
|
@Relequestual I think we should add the role&responsibilities of the Executive director/chair. An example here |
As suggested by @benjagm
Remove mention of OpenJS Foundation
I've made a new issue for this so we can proceed to test the governance process, as this will take some time. We may also want to defer defining the role given the current climate. |
Relequestual
dismissed
benjagm’s stale review
Moved concern to a new issue: #548
|
I'm merging this PR containing the governance process, in order to allow us to trial run/test the process for #521, per #423. The notice that this governance process is not ratified remains intact at the top of the document. While this PR has not itself received lots of reviews, its contense has by proxy of #325. The content of this PR was pulled out from #325. This does not mean the current document is set in stone, but more that we almost all agree it's a good starting point, and we should evaluate how it functions in practice in order to correct or replace it. |
Related to #325
During the review and revise process, PR 325 split content from the Charter document into a Governance document. Working out what should live in which was challenging.
Ultimatly, the two files needed to be added in two separate PRs to help streamline the review process.
See #325 (comment)
Otherwise, the history is maintained. This seemed easeir and more history preserving than any alternatives that came to mind.