-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 134
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
Create an Admin team #269
Comments
Oh, and for the record, I'm volunteering to help run this team. |
There have been multiple ideas floated for an "Admin Team" and I just want to reach some clarity on which this one proposing. There are essentially two versions I've heard:
|
I'm proposing the first option, "Spin out the administrative decision making from the TSC into a group." That said, it may make sense to incorporate parts of the second into this as well. I suspect that in practice this admin team will do a mixture of the two depending on what's being discussed. Travel approval, for example, probably wouldn't bubble up to the TSC to make a decision, but repo management may. I think that it's best to start working while we figure this out, as doing the work of implementing this will probably answer a lot of the questions we have around what the best thing is, while also unearthing new questions. |
To be certain, this proposal has a few differences from my proposal in #263. I'm definitely +1 on having an admin team but a few points.
|
So far these have all been approved, but at some point it will become necessary for certain requests to be prioritized over others in order to stay within a budget. Something to keep in mind as you potentially offload that prioritization to a subgroup without a lot of guidance on how to prioritize the requests.
Currently, the Board Chair does this directly with the TSC. The TSC is also responsible for voting in the Board Chair. If you split these two things then the voters in the Board Chair Election may not have enough context to make an educated vote since they don't actually interact with the role. |
I'm fine with this. I don't have a personal preference myself, I just know we had been informally calling it the "Admin WG" in discussion :)
I would argue that forming this team is a necessary precondition for #263 or collapsing them back, and I get the impression that most people are in favor of making some change. I think if we do not take this step, then #263/remerging will remain in discussion, so think of this as getting the ball rolling on larger changes.
Can you clarify? Is this because you don't think a repo is necessary for these activities? Or that we should not be forming the team at all? Other?
I like this idea! |
🤔. FWIW I think the only reason to take this on would be because we decided to implement #263. As such, this would not happen right away. |
I'll volunteer to participate in this team as well. |
Fixes: nodejs#101 Fixes: nodejs#125 Fixes: nodejs#269 Fixes: nodejs#285 Fixes: nodejs#289 Fixes: nodejs#295 Fixes: nodejs#328
As per the discussion in #263, I propose that we create an Admin team that will handle the administrative duties that the TSC oversees.
The admin team would be tasked with:
Let me know if I forgot anything on this list!
The long term goal will be to charter a working group, but I think we should follow precedent and get a team set up and get some work done before chartering as a WG. Some of these tasks could also be shifted to CommComm, but I think it's a good idea to make these changes incrementally.
How does this sound to everyone? ping @nodejs/tsc.
If there are no objections or suggestions, I will create a repo for the admin team on Wednesday May 24 and start adding content.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: