This topic came about as a result of the discussion around creating the governance document and its PR.

Summary of context:

• We decided that voting on the governance document would happen outside of the meeting, as some members of the TSC had not yet had a chance to review the PR for it. TSC members were asked to review the PR, thumbs up/approve the PR if it was ready to go, and leave comments on anything that should have been changed
• Some helpful comments were left on the PR, with the most recent occurring right before the next meeting. This was interleaved with other TSC members viewing the document
  • This meant that some TSC members likely reviewed and approved an earlier version of the document, and may have missed seeing the later updates to it
• Brad summarized the changes that had been made/suggested in the following meeting (which was good, because people might not have subscribed to the PR when they approved it)

My proposal:

• When asked to review a PR for TSC related matters, TSC members should expect to stay up to date on changes that occur to the PR themselves. Only controversial proposals should need to be brought up in a subsequent meeting.
  • Potential addendum: if the number of needed changes reach a certain threshold, TSC members could message that they've lost track and ask the PR author to reping them when it is ready for a subsequent review?