Skip to content
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

Adding Governance, Contribution Policy, and CoC #22

Closed
wants to merge 0 commits into from
Closed

Adding Governance, Contribution Policy, and CoC #22

wants to merge 0 commits into from

Conversation

mikeal
Copy link
Contributor

@mikeal mikeal commented Dec 2, 2014

This is the current governance and contribution policy from @isaacs and @othiym23 that is being presented to the Advisory Board for consideration in nodejs.


* Be respectful.
* We're here to help. Contact one of the following:
* <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

presumably these would need to be filled in first?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we should agree to the policy and then ask for volunteers. we can accept it with stubs and then put out a call for those volunteers.

@rvagg
Copy link
Member

rvagg commented Dec 2, 2014

so many words

but 👍

@mikeal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikeal commented Dec 2, 2014

@indutny we're actually already linking to this in the new README :)

@indutny
Copy link
Member

indutny commented Dec 2, 2014

LGTM, we need to fill in emails.

@mikeal mikeal added tc-agenda and removed tc-agenda labels Dec 2, 2014
@mikeal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikeal commented Dec 3, 2014

waiting on a better CoC without the need for an institution.

@ghostbar
Copy link
Contributor

ghostbar commented Dec 3, 2014

Personally, I think something shorter for Code of Conduct would do the job, like https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct.

The proposed code of conduct includes things that are not part of the conduct but contribution-considerations like line 23-25.

@isaacs
Copy link
Contributor

isaacs commented Dec 3, 2014

@mikeal I misspoke in our meeting today. The Rust-style CoC is actually already in this fork, so I'd recommend just omitting 745ba90, and instead, putting it on the agenda for a future TC decision once we're capable of putting the legals in place to support it.

Besides missing the email addresses for reporting abuse, we're also going to need a policy for receiving reports, grievance procedures, etc. All of that requires a company or foundation or whatever that is going to back it up.

@mikeal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikeal commented Dec 3, 2014

ok, removed the new CoC in favor of the existing one. @isaacs @indutny we good to merge?

@mikeal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikeal commented Dec 3, 2014

This is ready to merge, someone should merge it :)

## Membership

Initial membership invitations to the TC were given to individuals who
had been active contributors to Node, and who have significant
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

one "Node" and one "Node.js" reference in this paragraph needs to be fixed

rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2014
Policy originally by @isaacs and @othiym23, submitted by @mikeal,
committed fresh by @rvagg because .. #22 is kind of a mess

PR-URL: #22
Reviewed-By: Mikeal Rogers <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
@rvagg
Copy link
Member

rvagg commented Dec 4, 2014

Sorry @mikeal, the commit trail was such a mess here that I gave up trying to compact it down and just made a new one from scratch, so this is landed in 08e3008 and I took a punt on you not minding having your name on the commit for it.

@rvagg rvagg closed this Dec 4, 2014
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2014
Policy originally by @isaacs and @othiym23, submitted by @mikeal,
committed fresh by @rvagg because .. #22 is kind of a mess

PR-URL: #22
Reviewed-By: Mikeal Rogers <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2014
Policy originally by @isaacs and @othiym23, submitted by @mikeal,
committed fresh by @rvagg because .. #22 is kind of a mess

PR-URL: #22
Reviewed-By: Mikeal Rogers <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2014
Policy originally by @isaacs and @othiym23, submitted by @mikeal,
committed fresh by @rvagg because .. #22 is kind of a mess

PR-URL: #22
Reviewed-By: Mikeal Rogers <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <[email protected]>
@rdkgit rdkgit mentioned this pull request Nov 11, 2016
MylesBorins pushed a commit to MylesBorins/node that referenced this pull request Apr 11, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants