-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 52
The JSON Schema Charter #325
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 1 commit
0b8d59b
4666a22
3cc72d2
b7de5e1
a4bf147
327b09e
cdc7cf5
d60d388
ece5e53
2d38695
29ed1a5
c9a6006
d0d58ba
0c0f97c
557c0a2
5abe1bd
9ba125a
9301be9
e3ecb1e
f6ac84c
a2af3ba
3fc951e
df8930a
cfa2ae9
a6bc2a8
d30322d
fea1163
14d7ca2
90896a9
dc3785a
c35d423
c1f0fa4
42e1c54
1b31445
9634a60
8f1df0f
f5dd0f5
d083f46
6653e46
c84610a
a4943cd
94d1801
c9ab2dd
b5f0e85
b2efdce
d2f853c
035ab9b
dc3e685
631db8c
8eb9883
341ecef
f4e35ff
e94c0cb
9e1ad26
52bedb3
4a2ad4a
397a8d1
d79198e
59deddb
f1974e2
c872a5f
a974117
86ff12e
55aa9b3
75542a8
aea0b80
fbe8b54
63cf673
a996e13
2a92249
58d942b
8b2ed66
be38006
4c92fc6
507246b
26f9265
31d5f6e
47a0d79
37eccb2
bea5924
91d5133
cdce30b
06240f9
ad35025
ddf82c4
573ad4e
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
- Loading branch information
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -43,14 +43,30 @@ Most large, complex open source communities have both a business and a technical | |
|
||
Section Intentionally Left Blank | ||
|
||
## Section 3: ${PROJECT TSC} Governing Body | ||
## Section 3: JSON Schema Org Governing Body (TSC) | ||
<!-- https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/discussions/286#discussioncomment-4391284 --> | ||
|
||
_directions: describe the structure of the group responsible for managing_ | ||
_the project and its respective organization and repositories. If there are_ | ||
_specific rules for membership or participation in the group, list them here or_ | ||
_by reference to a governance.md document._ | ||
The TSC is initially established from the observed major contributors who are currently active and in good standing. | ||
|
||
ex. [Node.js TSC Charter](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/blob/HEAD/TSC-Charter.md#section-3-establishment-of-the-tsc) | ||
There is no maximum TSC membership size. The TSC must have a minimum of four members. | ||
|
||
Changes to TSC membership should be posted in the agenda, and may be suggested as any other agenda item. | ||
|
||
TSC memberships are not time-limited. | ||
|
||
While the project is not looking to obtain "Impact" project status within the OpenJS Foundation, there is no requirement set out to limit the number of TSC members by employer. It is in some cases considered difficult or even unhelpful for the project to limit the number or percentage of TSC members by employer (Especially when an employer has employed individuals already active in the community to work exclusivly on the open source project). While at this time there is no limits on TSC membership by employer, the TSC will strive to keep to at least less than 50%, ideally 33% (One third, one in three). The TSC will re-evaluate this specific clause at least every six months, and aim to revise it within one year to meet the "no more than 1/3 employer member affiliation" mandate. | ||
|
||
TSC members are expected to regularly participate in TSC activities. | ||
|
||
The TSC will meet regularly using virtual conferencing tools. The meeting will be directed by the TSC Chairperson(s). Responsibility for directing individual meetings may be delegated by a TSC Chairperson to any other TSC member. Minutes or an appropriate recording will be taken and made available to the community through accessible public postings. | ||
|
||
The TSC may, at its discretion, invite any number of non-voting observers to participate in the public portion of TSC discussions and meetings. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd encourage you to make those sessions public all the time. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. That's the intent! Public as much as possible! There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Whereby I meant that the session should be public by default (with an agenda and videoconf link made available upfront), not that it is private by default and that the TSC may decide to open it. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Agreed. That is what is intended. If it doesn't come across that way, it needs revising. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think this sentence is correct. It should be specified somewhere else that there might a private portion of the meeting. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, but the problem of making allowing access to the TSC meeting at the discretion of the TSC, is that this makes the meeting private by default, and requires action by the TSC to make it public. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It doesn't say that. It says the TSC may invite people to the public portion of the meeting. You're reading into it something which isn't there. Technically, as it is public, and the details of how to access it will be public, anyone could invite anyone. But I wanted to make it explicit that TSC may invite guests. I don't recall specifically where I borrowed the phrasing from, but I agree it is not clear and can be improved. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I dont doubt your intentions. I’m stating that the text doesn’t match them. ;) |
||
|
||
A TSC member may be removed by vote from the TSC if, during a 3-month period, all of the following are true: | ||
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Any restrictions on the maximum percentage of Governing Body members that can be employed by the same company? The risk of one company exerting undue influence over the direction of the project is real. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We looked at this before, I but I don't remember (or necessarily agree with) why it was removed. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This clause was seen more as a governance concern than a charter related concern, and was moved out to #456, specifically this line. (This also allows us to update it without having to go back to the OpenJS Foundation for their approval.)
I hear you. Regardless of what anyone in such a position reports, such as no to little influence, that doesn't mean things can't change, or it shouldn't be a concern. We are trying to start addressing this by engaging more with implementers: #412 - Comments and suggestions welcome. Additionally, we are looking to encourage users to self report: #441 Further, there are plans to create a stakeholders group: Community and DevRel Plan (view) (Although these are a little vague currently). Open to thoughts, suggestions, comments, on all of this and anything else that comes to mind as to how we can expand our TSC. @karenetheridge your voice carries weight here =] There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I don't think this presents an immediate problem anymore, but I do think it's still a good idea to have such a limitation. |
||
- They attend fewer than 25% of the regularly scheduled meetings | ||
Relequestual marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
- They do not participate in any TSC votes | ||
- They do not provide any form of excuse or no excuse is known for their absence | ||
|
||
## Section 4: Roles & Responsibilities | ||
Relequestual marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
|
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.