Add members to and remove members from the Technical Working Group

FYI opened #3361198: Remove the Technical Working Group and transfer its responsibilities to the core committer team → . Postponing this on that issue. If/when that is resolved as proposed, this issue should be closed as duplicate.

#3361198: Remove the Technical Working Group and transfer its responsibilities to the core committer team → has turned out to be even more complicated than we originally thought. As a short term measure at least, I think we need to re-open this issue.

Quoting myself from there...

...there is a line in the current TWG charter that says:

Members are appointed by Dries Buytaert and/or his designate(s).

I think Dries' decision last week also applies to the core committer team being 'designates' as regards the TWG. This means that we should be fine to appoint people to the TWG without explicit sign-off on each new member from Dries.

Therefore the next steps probably look like:

1. Core committers, acting as 'designates' appoint a subset of core committers to the TWG.
2. The new TWG membership can start unblocking specific issues.
3. Sort out the governance changes in parallel.

I'm therefore putting myself forward as a member of the technical working group to work on the coding standard committee.

I believe @larowlan is also volunteering for the same thing, and other core committers may also join.

Since we're acting as Dries' designates, we can then add that list of core committers to the TWG/coding standards committee and begin unblocking issues.

Confirming I'm also volunteering per above

As in #3 I would also volunteer for the TWG.

Re-titling since the coding standards committee doesn't exist independently of the TWG due to related Governance blockages.

I think the quickest route forward would be to rebase the MR on the current version of the repo or open a new MR and get the names in there that are still confirmed. We can get that in as designates of Dries and move forward with resolving issues with that team. We can figure out the charter changes separately.

I've made an MR that replaces the existing committee with the people listed in the proposed resolution, all of which are core committers. And as confirmed at the off-site meeting these are 'designates of Dries'.

For the other people who put their hand up, Björn Brala (bbrala) and Derek Wright (dww), Aaron McHale and urvashi_vora, the change being made here is a first step. It is being done to ensure that the existing governance processes are followed, as best we can. Once the group is formed we can address the various governance issues and change the membership.

I'm in full agreement with the current MR. Both with regards to me and the other inactive members being removed and with the currently proposed 4 people being added.

Yay thanks for all confirmations!

Gábor Hojtsy → credited Dries → .

Landed this, thanks all!

The charter does not define how coding standard issues are resolved, whether they are delegated or not from the TWG, so to adjust that process does not require a change to the charter as far as I see. In practice coding standards issues were delegated in the past to the maintainers of https://www.drupal.org/project/coding_standards → , not all of whom were TWG members. Now the updated members of the TWG are empowered to make adjustments to the member list there and to the processes in https://www.drupal.org/project/coding_standards → as appropriate, or can even decide whether that process is even used or not.

While the coding standard process does not require amending the charter as far as I see, the charter as-is does not give members the power to disband the group or to change the charter without Drupal Association signoff (see at the bottom). I was separately in contact with the chair of the board at the DA @baddysonja to try to figure out a designate from the DA to discuss changes with, but we don't know what those changes may be, so it may be best to reopen that conversation when/if there are actual charter changes needed? (Not in this issue).

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

quietone → closed merge request !2

Opened a follow-up #3378689: Add more members to the coding standards committee part II →