FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending |
URL:
| Home
Tools: [Download Repo ZIP]   [Original HTTPS Page]

doc: add Inclusivity Working Group by ashleygwilliams · Pull Request #4355 · nodejs/node · GitHub

/ node Public

doc: add Inclusivity Working Group - #4355

Closed
ashleygwilliams wants to merge 1 commit into
nodejs:masterfrom
ashleygwilliams:add-incl-wg
Closed

doc: add Inclusivity Working Group#4355
ashleygwilliams wants to merge 1 commit into
nodejs:masterfrom
ashleygwilliams:add-incl-wg

Conversation

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

zkat commented Dec 19, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

LGTM although I'm not sure if mine counts for this since I'm not TSC :) 🐑

ghost commented Dec 19, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown

pseudo-LGTM, also cc @nodejs/inclusivity

mscdex added the doc Issues and PRs related to Node.js documentation. label Dec 19, 2015

mikeal commented Dec 19, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Personally, I think that this working group should live under the TSC, not the CTC (Core Technical Committee) which means we should ratify it in nodejs/tsc. The charter and project lifecycle allow us to have working groups directly under the TSC. This would be the first but I think that is where it belongs :)

Being that you'd be the first you'd actually be creating the WORKING_GROUPS.md file in nodejs/tsc :)

Comment thread WORKING_GROUPS.md

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

I still have issues with the use of the word enforcement here. I recommend splitting this into two pieces and rewording to,

+ Serve as a resource for the development of workflows that protect community members and projects from harassment and abuse.
+ Work within the project and the community at large to ensure effective implementation of those workflows.

The issue with using enforcement is that it implies the ability to take punitive action and generally carries negative connotation.

jasnell commented Dec 19, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I agree with @mikeal. The inclusivity working group should be chartered under the TSC not CTC. Recommend closing this PR and opening an equivalent in nodejs/TSC.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

+1 for moving to the TSC. uno momento

jasnell commented Dec 20, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

hmm... the new PR doesn't actually add the Inclusivity WG details... did I miss something?

ghost commented Dec 20, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@jasnell i think it's clarified here: nodejs/TSC#24 (comment)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

yup, @sup, spot on. @jasnell, or anyone, can follow the inclusivity ratification process in this issue: nodejs/inclusivity#69. it is currently blocked by nodejs/TSC#24

jasnell commented Dec 20, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

OK, yep missed that one! Thanks @sup!

This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

doc Issues and PRs related to Node.js documentation.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

get ratified by the TSC

5 participants


Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL