Clarify the Charter so that contractors are explicity counted as affialiated#1650
Clarify the Charter so that contractors are explicity counted as affialiated#1650
Conversation
|
cc @nodejs/tsc |
Co-authored-by: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
tniessen
left a comment
tniessen
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On a side note, I would naively assume that "contractual obligations" is too broad, but I am neither a lawyer nor is English my native language.
|
Not a lawyer, I assume sponsorships that bound with goals are not considered as some sort of "by any possible means, ... and contractual obligations". Is this a correct assumption? |
|
@legendecas Naively, I'd assume that paying for a streaming service is a contractual obligation, but that what you are describing is not :) |
Signed-off-by: Matteo Collina <hello@matteocollina.com>
|
@richardlau @mhdawson @nodejs/tsc PTAL |
legendecas
left a comment
legendecas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The updated text looks better to me!
TSC-Charter.md
Outdated
| As a result, no more than one-fourth of the TSC voting members may be affiliated with the | ||
| the same company. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess this sentence can be removed if we go with my rewrite suggestion above?
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
|
@nodejs/tsc ptal |
|
The first paragraph says "company or other entity", but the 2nd paragraph refers only to "company". Consider changing those references to "company/entity" for consistency. |
joesepi
left a comment
joesepi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. Approving as a Node.js collaborator as well as an OpenJS CPC member. ✌️
|
This is approved, I'll land after tomorrow TSC meeting. |
20 participants
Some people mighrt be contracted to work on OSS on behalf of companies. This does not make them less affiliated, and it might be used to circumvent the affiliation rules.