Update charter with communication responsibilities #1754
Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <[email protected]>
- Loading branch information
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ including: | |
|
|
||
| The TSC will define Node.js project’s release vehicles. | ||
|
|
||
| Communication on topics where the scope of the TSC intersects with that of the [OpenJS CPC][] or the [OpenJS board][] will be handled in collaboration with the other two bodies, facilitated by the TSC representative on the CPC. | ||
|
|
||
| If a Node.js-specific communication channel, such as a social media account or a discussion forum, is established by another party and used to represent the technical work or the technical community of the project, the TSC may request administrator or moderator access to ensure representation is aligned with the consensus within the project. Day-to-day operation in such channels can be delegated to another party as long as they follow the Code of Conduct, and respect the consensus seeking process before representation of the project is manifested. | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. There is no "other party" that can establish an official channel. The only party is the holder of the trademarks - the OpenJS Foundation. We are part of the OpenJS Foundation, and we can use those trademarks.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. There is a fine line between being official or not - for example, the Discord wasn’t official until there was effort to make it official. Someone can also just set up a social media bot to post all the releases without declaring the bot official. Or initiatives like https://www.nodetodo.org/ https://nodeschool.io/ (no longer active, but I think you know what I mean). The passage just documents that when that happens, and the administrator wants to turn it official, the TSC may request administrator or moderator access to ensure alignment, but may not actually moderate it themselves as long as the delegate respect the general rule the community on GitHub has been following. It’s what we’ve already been doing. Whether the trademark should be granted to them is out of the scope of the TSC charter since the TSC is not in charge of the trademark (at most, we can forward communication with them to the foundation staff, which is also what we've been doing). |
||
|
|
||
|
|
@@ -184,3 +184,5 @@ and Contributors looking to participate in the development effort. | |
| [Condorcet]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method | ||
| [Consensus Seeking]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus-seeking_decision-making | ||
| [Single Transferable Vote]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote | ||
| [OpenJS CPC]: https://github.com/openjs-foundation/cross-project-council/blob/main/CPC-CHARTER.md | ||
| [OpenJS board]: https://images.prismic.io/openjsf/c31b195a-83c9-4d89-9d92-d0cb8840ea20_OpenJS-Foundation-Bylaws-2023-09-18.pdf | ||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.