What process should exist for changing GOVERNANCE.md?

[lydia-duncan]

This was something that came up in today's TSC meeting. We expect to merge the first version of it soon

[lydia-duncan]

I'm not sure if this was what Brad was thinking about, but here's an idea that came to mind for me:

• A TSC member or community member (hereafter referred to as the proposer) brings a proposal to a TSC meeting
  • The committee at the next available opportunity discusses the change and whether it seems reasonable
    • The proposer (or a selected TSC member, if the proposer is not a TSC member) opens a PR with the change
    • Reviewer(s) for the PR are selected at the meeting
      • The process decided on in What expectations should we have of TSC members w.r.t. this and the governance repo? #5 is followed for reviewing the PR

[lydia-duncan]

Abhishek had a good idea on the initial PR about reducing the need for edits to be made (by having committers be tracked separate from GOVERNANCE.md)

[bradcray]

(Originally written for #5, but a better fit here):

My intuition here is to define a working group who's in charge of the GOVERNANCE.md document and committed to being responsive to it, just to focus on those who care about the topic and are devoted to following it closely. Anyone on the TSC could be in that working group but nobody would feel that they need to be. The working group would be responsible for keeping the TSC apprised of proposed or actual changes to the document.