Repository: nodejs/node
Pull request: doc: add review guidelines for collaborator nominations

I don't know if we _need_ guidelines, but here is that PR anyway :) those are based only on my way of reviewing, so feel free to disagree / suggest improvements.

<!--
Before submitting a pull request, please read:

- the CONTRIBUTING guide at https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/HEAD/CONTRIBUTING.md
- the commit message formatting guidelines at
  https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/HEAD/doc/contributing/pull-requests.md#commit-message-guidelines

For code changes:
1. Include tests for any bug fixes or new features.
2. Update documentation if relevant.
3. Ensure that `make -j4 test` (UNIX), or `vcbuild test` (Windows) passes.

If you believe this PR should be highlighted in the Node.js CHANGELOG
please add the `notable-change` label.

Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.
-->


Changed files:
filename: GOVERNANCE.md
patch: @@ -183,6 +183,34 @@ Collaborators might overlook someone with valuable contributions. In that case,
 the contributor may open an issue or contact a collaborator to request a
 nomination.
 
+#### How to review a collaborator nomination
+
+A collaborator nomination can be reviewed in the same way one would review a PR
+adding a feature:
+
+* If you see the nomination as something positive to the project, say so!
+* If you are neutral, or feel you don't know enough to have an informed opinion,
+  it's certainly OK to not interact with the nomination.
+* If you think the nomination was made too soon, or can be detrimental to the
+  project, share your concerns, ideally before the public nomination is opened,
+  and avoid sharing those concerns outside of the Collaborator discussion area.
+  Ideally, list what step(s) the nominee could take that would make you
+  approve their nomination.
+  Given that there is no "Request for changes" feature in discussions and issues,
+  try to be explicit when your comment is expressing a blocking concern.
+  Similarly, once the blocking concern has been addressed, explicitly say so.
+
+Our goal is to keep gate-keeping at a minimal, but it cannot be zero since being
+a collaborator requires trust (collaborators can start CI jobs, use their veto,
+push commits, etc.), so what's the minimal amount is subjective, and there will
+be cases where collaborators disagree on whether a nomination should move
+forward.
+
+When concerns have been raised on the private discussion, refrain from opening
+the public issue. If no one has explicitly blocked the nomination and you'd like
+it to move forward, comment something like "If I don't hear any objections
+before (some time), I will open the public issue".
+
 ### Onboarding
 
 After the nomination passes, a TSC member onboards the new collaborator. See