Merge branch 'remove-sec-arch-template' into 'master'

Remove Sec Architectural Council template

See merge request https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/171215



Merged-by: Lucas Charles <me@lucascharles.me>
Approved-by: Lucas Charles <me@lucascharles.me>
Co-authored-by: Thiago Figueiró <tfigueiro@gitlab.com>

.gitlab/issue_templates/Sec Architectural Council Proposal.md

-# Sec Architectural Council Proposal
-
-- [ ] I have read the [Sec Architectural Council](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/#architectural-council-slack-s_sec-architectural-council) handbook entry.
-- [ ] I have read the [Engineering Architecture](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/architecture) page.
-- [ ] A DRI has already been assigned in the [Reviewed by](#reviewed-by) section of this issue based the above guidance.
-
-## Table of Contents
-
-- [Proposal](#proposal)
-- [Scope](#scope)
-- [Out of scope](#out-of-scope)
-- [In scope](#in-scope)
-- [Reviewed by](#reviewed-by)
-- [SLO](#slo)
-
-## Proposal
-
-<!--
-Review the proposal process here: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/#architectural-council-slack-s_sec-architectural-council 
-
-TL;DR you want to ask and discuss the following to arrive at a proposed solution:
-
-1. What is the issue at hand and what is the preferred action?
-2. What are the potential solutions and their associated pros/cons?
-3. What approach was decided and why?
--->
-
-### What is the issue at hand?
-
-### What is the preferred action?
-
-### What are the potential solutions?
-
-<!------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-| Define a few headings inside of the proposal to go over your solution.       |
-| If you have more than one solution creating comment threads and summarizing  |
-| conversations in the issue description description could be easier to follow |
-| for folks.                                                                   |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
-<!-- StartSolution -->
-
-#### Solution A
-
-<!--
--->
-
-##### Solution A Pros
-
-<!--
--->
-
-##### Solution A Cons
-
-<!--
--->
-
-<!-- EndSolution -->
-
-### What approach was decided and why?
-
-<!--
--->
-
-### Scope
-
-Use the checkboxes below to determine whether your is in scope for the Sec Architectural Council.
-
-#### Out of scope
-
-If any of the following apply then this issue is out of scope for the Sec Architectural Council.
-  - [ ] Does not involve architectural decisions
-  - [ ] Is after-the-fact
-
-#### In scope
-
-If any of the following apply then a proposal *should* be made:
-  - [ ] Has a broad impact within Sec
-
-If any of the following apply then you may opt-in to submitting a proposal to the Sec Architectural Council:
-  - [ ] Is not already covered by architecture guidelines/handbook
-  - [ ] Is a new unit of work
-  - [ ] Is strictly Secure
-  - [ ] Involves architectural decisions
-
-Once opted-in in some cases you may find that you:
-  - [ ] Could not come to an agreement (escalation)
-
-In which case you may opt-out closing this proposal if there is no broad impact within of Sec. If doing so please close the issue with a comment summarizing of your decision given you will follow standard architecture guidelines.
-
-## Reviewed by
-
-Assigned DRI: `@dri`
-
-I am asking The following Sec Architectural Council [Team Representatives][] to review the proposal outline in this issue:
-  - [ ] @alan representing the [Security Policies](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/govern/security-policies/) team
-  - [ ] @cam_swords representing the [Dynamic Analysis](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/secure/dynamic-analysis/) team
-  - [ ] @fcatteau or @adamcohen representing the [Composition Analysis](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/secure/composition-analysis/) team
-  - [ ] @idawson representing the [Vulnerability Research](secure/vulnerability-research/) team
-  - [ ] @julianthome representing the [Vulnerability Research](secure/vulnerability-research/) team
-  - [ ] @minac representing the [Threat Insights Backend](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/govern/threat-insights/) team
-  - [ ] @svedova representing the [Threat Insights Frontend](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/govern/threat-insights/) team
-  - [ ] @theoretick representing the [Static Analysis](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/secure/static-analysis/) team
-- [ ] @sashi_kumar representing the [Security Policies](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/govern/security-policies) team
-- [ ] @huzaifaiftikhar1 representing the [Compliance](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/govern/compliance) team
-<!-- Please update the following quick action in case of changes to the representatives list above. -->
-/assign @alan @cam_swords @fcatteau @idawson @julianthome @minac @svedova @sashi_kumar @huzaifaiftikhar1
-
-## SLO
-
-While the Sec Architectural Council has a Service Level Objective of 2-business days our Team Representatives are spread out globally so it may take longer than 48 hours in some cases for all parties to review your proposal.
-
-Please update this issue's Due Date accordingly when you:
-  * Create a proposal after Wednesday 17:00 Australian Eastern Time/Japan Time.
-  * Create a proposal over the weekend (e.g. before Monday 09:00 Mountain Time/Pacific Time).
-
----
-
-[Proposal](#proposal)|[Scope](#scope)|[Out of scope](#out-of-scope)|[In scope](#in-scope)|[Reviewed by](#reviewed-by)|[SLO](#slo)
-
-[Team Representatives]: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/development/sec/#team-representatives
-
-<!-- Due Date for meeting our 2 day SLO. -->
-/due in 2 days
-/label ~"group::threat insights" ~"devops::govern" ~section::sec