Update nomination process for team members #55
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This pull request updates the governance documentation to clarify and expand the nomination process for team members across different Node.js website-related teams. The changes empower existing team members to nominate new individuals, making the process more collaborative and autonomous.
Key Changes:
- Clarified that Web Infra Team members can nominate new individuals (previously only TSC and Build WG could nominate)
- Clarified that UX & Design Team members can nominate new individuals (previously only TSC could nominate)
- Updated reference format for member list location to use direct link to MEMBERS.md
Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.
|
This is a change of governance, so pinging @nodejs/tsc |
|
Note that any of the approvals above from @avivkeller / @bjohansebas are invalid for these changes. Appreciate the approvals, but we need to have approvals from the TSC here. |
| Web Infra Team members should have access to be able to maintain the services mentioned above. | ||
|
|
||
| Members of this team are nominated either by the Node.js Technical Steering Committee (TSC) or the Node.js Build WG and follow the guidelines provided in the Collaborator Guidelines of the Node.js Build WG. Note that members of the Node.js Web Team might also recommend people for nomination. | ||
| Members of this team are nominated either by the Node.js Technical Steering Committee (TSC) or the Node.js Build WG and follow the guidelines provided in the Collaborator Guidelines of the Node.js Build WG. Current members of the Node.js Web Infra Team may also nominate individuals. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be significantly expanded to make it easier to evaluate candidates.
Ultimately, this is a high trust position in the project.
Please link to
https://github.com/nodejs/build/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md#wg-membership
and provide some additional text as well.
|
Adding to the tsc-agenda for visibility, no specific question. |
The origin of this policy was not an oversight for web-infra, and the other groups followed from there. web-infra responsibility were historically handled by Build, so that's why Build can nominate/had oversight. The fundamental reason is that web-infra is a high-trust position. |
|
Added this section, adapting and linking to Build WG language 
|
|
Echoing much of what I said in #54 (comment), I think perhaps it'd be useful to explicitly include a strong justification for specifically why a nominee needs the access granted by joining web-infra as part of the nomination process, due to the high trust nature of the team? |
I... don't know what else to say here. The scope seems clear to me. People that are consistently doing the three bullet points in that section, as non-members, over time, are proving their trust and competence to be on the team.
Do other WGs follow a nomination template? I usually see people copy/paste a previous nomination's git searches. In the case of the nomination this was derived off of, that has been followed. |
|
I agree with @bmuenzenmeyer. I highly doubt that a nomination will come through with little thought. If a contributor puts in enough effort to warrant a nomination, I'd assume the nominator is certain about the nominee's "trust". |
|
Also echoing Matt's comments. Let's just be aware that someone being nominated to Web Infra comes from the perspective of:
|
|
think we should wait for the TSC meeting before merge |
In my opinion, the @nodejs/web-infra and @nodejs/ux-and-design teams should be able to nominate new individuals into their ranks.
@ovflowd and I discussed the origin of the current policy briefly in Slack - we think it was an oversight (Claudio correct me if wrong)