Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Governance document #456

Merged
merged 79 commits into from
Nov 28, 2023
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
79 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
0b8d59b
Initial commit of charter template Copy from OpenJS Foundation CPC repo
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
4666a22
Add comments to heading for people who might edit the file, and a lin…
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
3cc72d2
Add content for Guiding Principles
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
b7de5e1
Add content for Scope section
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
a4bf147
Modified version of Scope
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
327b09e
Add sections 1.1 and 1.2 re scope In-scope does not yet have any sugg…
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
cdc7cf5
Add Relationship with OpenJS Foundation CPC section
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
d60d388
Add Other Formal Project Relationships section Left blank
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
ece5e53
Add Governing Body (TSC) section
Relequestual Feb 7, 2023
2d38695
Add Roles and Responsibilities section
Relequestual Feb 9, 2023
29ed1a5
Add Project Operations and Management section
Relequestual Feb 9, 2023
c9a6006
Add Decision-making and Voting section
Relequestual Feb 10, 2023
d0d58ba
Add Definitions section
Relequestual Feb 10, 2023
0c0f97c
Add footer with links to resources
Relequestual Feb 10, 2023
557c0a2
Fix typos
Relequestual Feb 20, 2023
5abe1bd
Add note about how testing for agreement is not the same as voting.
Relequestual Feb 21, 2023
9ba125a
Refine consensus model
Relequestual Feb 23, 2023
9301be9
Tidy up and break out section for ADRs
Relequestual Feb 23, 2023
e3ecb1e
Add definition of TSC
Relequestual Mar 3, 2023
f6ac84c
Recognize other project roles to be defined
Relequestual Mar 3, 2023
a2af3ba
Add detail about signal based voting at the Test for Agreement stage …
Relequestual Mar 8, 2023
3fc951e
Spacing
Relequestual Mar 8, 2023
df8930a
Amend decision making process in charter
Relequestual Mar 14, 2023
cfa2ae9
Fix inconsistent name for repos
Relequestual Mar 14, 2023
a6bc2a8
Add details for project scope in the charter
Relequestual Mar 14, 2023
d30322d
Add line about non-technical conflicts to the charter
Relequestual Mar 16, 2023
fea1163
Update CHARTER.md
Relequestual Mar 20, 2023
14d7ca2
Fix using upper case inside bracket
Relequestual Mar 24, 2023
90896a9
Remove specific mention of linting tooling.
Relequestual Mar 28, 2023
dc3785a
Add time limits to some stages of consensus process
Relequestual Mar 30, 2023
c35d423
Provide blocker fallback
Relequestual Apr 6, 2023
c1f0fa4
Add details to ADR for consensus based TSC
Relequestual Apr 11, 2023
42e1c54
Remove comments not intended for final document
Relequestual Apr 13, 2023
1b31445
Fix typo
Relequestual Apr 13, 2023
9634a60
Remove additional comment and mention governance document is to be cr…
Relequestual Apr 13, 2023
8f1df0f
Remove (optional) from headings in charter
Relequestual Apr 13, 2023
f5dd0f5
Add initial TSC members list
Relequestual Apr 13, 2023
d083f46
Fix grammar
Relequestual Apr 13, 2023
6653e46
Fix typo in charter
Relequestual Apr 13, 2023
c84610a
Apply grammar and typo fixes to charter from PR review
Relequestual Apr 13, 2023
a4943cd
Remove specific TSC member requirement about meetings
Relequestual Apr 17, 2023
94d1801
Fix double typo with thanks to @mwadams
Relequestual Apr 17, 2023
c9ab2dd
List names and links for the TSC members
Relequestual Apr 18, 2023
b5f0e85
Fix typo and quotes in charter
Relequestual Apr 18, 2023
b2efdce
Fix typos and quotes in charter
Relequestual Apr 18, 2023
d2f853c
Fix grammar in charter
Relequestual Apr 18, 2023
035ab9b
Remove 'section' from titles
Relequestual Apr 18, 2023
dc3e685
Fix language specific spellings in charter
Relequestual Apr 18, 2023
631db8c
Specifically mention specifications we use and that use us as out of …
Relequestual Apr 18, 2023
8eb9883
Do not reference 'JSON Schema Org'
Relequestual Apr 24, 2023
341ecef
Do not define what the OpenJS Foundation does, per feedback from the …
Relequestual Apr 25, 2023
f4e35ff
Remove mention of fund and budgeting, as the charter is about the fou…
Relequestual Apr 25, 2023
e94c0cb
Remove mention of finances as per last commit
Relequestual Apr 25, 2023
9e1ad26
Remove mention of special interest groups in favour of noting the com…
Relequestual Apr 25, 2023
52bedb3
Loosen TSC meeting expectations
Relequestual Apr 26, 2023
4a2ad4a
Intro section better reflects the JSON Schema projects relationship w…
Relequestual Apr 25, 2023
397a8d1
Don't use 'we' and use proper pronouns
Relequestual May 3, 2023
d79198e
Move the list of initial TSC members outside of the charter document
Relequestual May 3, 2023
59deddb
Use 'private' as opposed to 'non-public'
Relequestual May 3, 2023
f1974e2
Remove the explicit mention of ingesting tooling into the project
Relequestual Jun 15, 2023
c872a5f
Note what kinds of discussions and votes can and should be made private
Relequestual Jun 16, 2023
a974117
Move the paragraph about TSC period of leave to membership section
Relequestual Jun 16, 2023
86ff12e
Create governance document and move governance and process related co…
Relequestual Jun 23, 2023
55aa9b3
Refined definition of TSC in context
Relequestual Jun 23, 2023
75542a8
Move content about voting and additional project roles from charter t…
Relequestual Jun 26, 2023
aea0b80
Add interoperability to list of in scope concerns
Relequestual Jun 26, 2023
fbe8b54
Change 'JSON data' to 'JSON-compatible data' in charter
Relequestual Jun 27, 2023
63cf673
Use more inclusive phrasing
Relequestual Jul 10, 2023
a996e13
Remove content which is mostly a duplication of section 2
Relequestual Jul 10, 2023
2a92249
Simplify out of scope sction. Add engaging with upstream and downstre…
Relequestual Jul 11, 2023
58d942b
Move TSC policy elements to charter from governance document
Relequestual Jul 13, 2023
8b2ed66
Add that TSC meetings should have an agenda
Relequestual Jul 13, 2023
be38006
Move roles and responsibilities section back to charter document with…
Relequestual Jul 25, 2023
4c92fc6
Migrate some content regarding process out of the governance document…
Relequestual Jul 25, 2023
750da40
Remove files not related to governance for this PR
Relequestual Jul 25, 2023
4f47578
Fix typo
Relequestual Aug 18, 2023
1d61615
Make labels prefixed with `tsc`
Relequestual Oct 17, 2023
c105658
Modify TSC membership by employer conditions
Relequestual Oct 17, 2023
7065e1d
Update GOVERNANCE.md
Relequestual Oct 17, 2023
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
161 changes: 161 additions & 0 deletions GOVERNANCE.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,161 @@
🚨 This document is not ratified 🚨
In the process of creating a charter, many "process" and governance related things were included in the draft of the charter. Feedback was that the charter should not include such content, and that it should be moved to a separate file. This is that file.
The initial commit includes content already approved by the group, however some additional content will be added at a later point, and this comment removed.
For context, see https://github.com/json-schema-org/community/pull/325

---

# Governance
<!-- This document is managed in the json-schema-org/community GitHub repository. Please do NOT modify this file in another repository as changes may be overridden. -->

## JSON Schema Governing Body (TSC)
It is in some cases considered difficult or even unhelpful for the project to limit the number or percentage of TSC members by employer (especially when an employer has employed individuals already active in the community to work exclusively on the open source project). While at this time there are no limits on TSC membership by employer, as soon as the TSC reach 10 members a rule will be enabled to set the limit to at least less than 50%, ideally 33% (One third, one in three).

TSC members are expected to regularly participate in TSC activities.

When the TSC meets using virtual conferencing tools, the meeting will be directed by the TSC Chairperson(s). Responsibility for directing individual meetings may be delegated by a TSC Chairperson to any other TSC member. Minutes or an appropriate recording will be taken and made available to the community through accessible public postings.

TSC meetings should have a clearly defined agenda.

At any point, any TSC member may notify the TSC that they are taking a period of leave and should be considered to abstain from any signaling or voting. The TSC member must detail when they expect to return.

The TSC may, at its discretion, invite any number of non-voting observers to participate in the public portion of TSC discussions and meetings.

A TSC member may be removed by vote from the TSC if, during a 3-month period, all of the following are true:

- They do not participate in any TSC related discussions or votes
- They do not provide any form of excuse or no excuse is known for their absence

There may be other grounds for removal from the TSC, such as seriously violating the Code of Conduct.

## Decision Making

### Decision-making via consensus

Both the Quick and Standard consensus process require the creation of an Issue in the TSC GitHub repository.
The Issue must:
- Include brief introductory information about the decision that needs to be made
- Be labeled with `tsc-decision`
- Use the provided template, unless there is a good reason not to do so

#### Quick consensus process

In the event a TSC member feels the need for a decision to be expedited, they may create the decision discussion, indicating that they wish to use the quick process rather than the standard consensus process. This should be done by creating a new Issue in the TSC repository.
In addition to the requirements above, the Issue must be labeled `expedited`.

While an associated Discussion is not required, if one is used, it must be clearly linked in both directions, and be labeled with `tsc-decision`.

#### Quick consensus process

A vote is called to see if other members agree. The vote takes place on the opening comment. This vote is different from the decision-making voting process, and only requires 3 (additional) votes in favour and none against to carry. If the vote carries, the quick process is started, otherwise the standard consensus process is started.

The quick process is designed for small trivial issues where the resolution feels likely obvious, and the member who proposes the decision discussion has at least one clear resolution to present. The decision discussion owner should present the possible solution they are advocating for (in a follow up comment on the Issue. Not in the opening comment.), and ask to test for agreement. If consensus is not clearly reached, the quick process is ended and the standard consensus process is started. (Label `expedited` should be removed and `tsc-stage-1` added.)

#### Standard consensus process

The standard consensus process is designed for all non-trivial decisions.

A decision discussion may be started by creating an Issue and Discussion in the TSC repository.

In addition to the requirements above, the Issue must:
- Be labeled with `tsc-stage-1`
- Link to the associated initial Discussion

The Discussion must:
- Link to the associated Issue
- Include detailed introductory information about the decision that needs to be made
- Be labeled with `tsc-decision`

The standard consensus process should progress through the following seven stages.

1. Introduction and clarify the issue
2. Open the discussion - Share needs and perspectives on the issue
3. Explore ideas in a broad discussion
4. Form a proposal
5. Amend the proposal
6. Test for agreement
7. Determine resolution

(These stages are those defined by the [Seeds For Change's Consensus Decision Making document](https://seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus). Please use that document as a rough guide for specific steps while the JSON Schema project tests and firms up our specific requirements, and document them in our yet to be created [Governance document](./GOVERNANCE.md))

All decisions that go through the standard consensus process must have an associated GitHub Issue, which allows those unable to attend meetings to participate.
The opening comment of the Issue should be kept up to date as to the status of the decision.

Transition between stages may be requested by anyone, but must be called by the facilitator (either a TSC chair or TSC member delegated the facilitator role for a given decision discussion). The stage will be indicated in the opening comment of the Issue and using the appropriate label.

Stages 1 and 6 are required to be open for at least 7 days or until every TSC member has confirmed they wish to progress to the next stage (Progression will still be "called", as above). This includes signals of abstaining given automatically via a notification of period of leave from TSC activity. For stage 2, any TSC member may request a 7 day extension to allow for further consideration. Should there be no reasonable objection (determined by a TSC Chair), the minimum time will be extended by 7 days. A TSC member may request multiple extensions, however lack of justification may result in the TSC member being asked to consider abstaining instead. There are no other explicit time limits placed on the other stages of the process.

Most of the discussion should happen within the associated Discussion. The Issue should mostly be used to update and report the progress of the consensus process. Groups looking to form a proposal or amend a proposal (stages 4 and 5) may make use of other additional Discussions or Issues, but these must be clearly linked. The opening comment should be updated to include links to relevant specific threads and comments in associated Discussion, and any other relevant locations.

Moving to the "Form a Proposal" stage should be approached when the group might feel able to combine ideas to form a single proposal. Multiple possible solutions should be discussed in the previous stage.

The "Test for Agreement" step is not voting, and is instead asking for "signals", which enable the consensus process to continue.
Voting should be considered a last resort if the consensus process has failed for a particular issue, to enable the project to move forward.

If someone calls for a Test for Agreement, the facilitator for the decision discussion will review the current proposal and may call to Test for Agreement. The facilitator will post a comment on the Issue (using the provided template), linking to the current version of the proposal, and update the opening comment with a link to the new comment. TSC members will then be asked to signal their agreement using GitHub Reactions on the comment.

The signals include "Block". Any use of the "Block" signal will require a new or amended proposal to be worked on. A "Block" should be used to indicate a strong objection, such as something against the project's core principles or something that would harm the project.

The blocker/s should be prepared to commit to trying to find a solution, but not necessarily form and present a solution by themselves. The TSC will look to facilitate a number of workshops to help understand the blocking objections, and form a new or amended proposal as a result. If the blocker/s are unable or unwilling to participate in attempts to find a solution, after multiple attempts, the original proposal is moved to a vote, as defined in this document, but additionally requiring a 75% super majority to pass. This will be at the discretion of the TSC Chairs.

If someone feels a "Block" is being used for unfair reasons, such as targeting individuals or to gain some personal advantage, or any such reason that might be in breach of our Code of Conduct, they should immediately report it to the Code of Conduct committee. The Code of Conduct committee should report this to the TSC Chairs as soon as possible, and the decision is halted while the committee investigates the report.

The Code of Conduct committee will report their findings and any remediation action to the TSC Chairs.
Reports must remain anonymous, as per the Code of Conduct.

The other signals that may be made when a Test For Agreement is called include "Reservations" and "Stand Aside". Both are signals which convey consent to let the proposal pass, however they may be conditional.

Signaling "Reservations" means an agreement on the overall direction, however there is some desire to revise or amend the proposal somewhat. It is expected that the individuals signaling "Reservations" want to engage in reworking the proposal. The facilitator will check with each individual regarding the strength of the reservation, and later facilitate or direct discussion as required to amend and represent the proposal. If the individual/s do not wish to participate in reworking the proposal, their reservations should be logged as part of the decision record as unresolved.

If "Reservations" is signalled three consecutive times by the same individual/s, anyone may call for no further attempts to remediate the reservations, and the proposal will pass.

Signaling "Stand Aside" conveys consent, but an unwillingness for whatever reason to be further involved. It could be for example that the individual does not have time to participate, or that they have limited opinions on the specific decision. The individual may provide a reason for standing aside. If the individual believes the reason can be remedied by the group, the group should seek to remedy the reason where possible, with help from the facilitator.

The TSC will make every reasonable effort to reach unanimity based consensus. If unanimity seems unlikely after several failed attempts to revise the proposal and Test for Agreement, if the proposal is clear, the decision may be moved to a vote, at the discretion of the TSC Chairs. This is a last resort.

The "Determine resolution" step should result in the creation of an [Any Decision Record](./docs/adr/README.md). More details in following sections.

### Decision-making via vote

Any call for public TSC votes will be made by creating an Issue in the TSC repository with the `tsc-vote` label assigned. The Issue should use the provided template.

Once an Issue gains the label `tsc-vote`, all members of the TSC will be notified via a specific Slack channel (and by any additional method the TSC deems helpful). The votes will be collected by way of using GitHub Reactions on a specific comment, which must not be the first comment. The first comment must link to the voting comment in the same Issue.
Voting will by default close after 7 days. Any member of the TSC may request a 7 day extension for any reason, moving the closing date back by 7 days. Any member of the TSC may request additional extensions, approved at the discretion of any TSC chair.

For a vote to carry, a quorum of 75% is required by default.

If a TSC member wants to call for a vote that they wish to be private, they must do so by contacting the TSC Chairs directly.
At the discretion of the TSC Chairs, a vote may be made private, and will then be handled by creating an Issue in the `TSC-private` repository.

The topic and nature of private votes may remain private, including the results. (It is expected that vast majority of votes will be public. Private voting should only be used in exceptional circumstances.)

The kinds of votes which should be private include things related to security reports or discussions with an entity where it might not be desireable to be made public knowledge to either party. This could include details of case studies or partnerships which are not yet concluded or published, where either party may need a final approval for publication or wishes for coordinated or scheduled public publication.

### Documenting decisions

Either initially, or at any point during the process, any TSC member may suggest the issue being discussed is "significant or noteworthy." If there are no objections, the resolution actions for the issue must include the creation of an Any Decision Record (previously named Architectural Decision Record). The Any Decision Record (ADR) should include as much information as is thought to be useful, following the provided template. The Pull Request for the ADR must be approved by all those who were involved in the decision making process, which must also be documented in the ADR as the "deciders."

(The quick consensus process does not require an Any Decision Record, but the decision should be minuted.)

Private decisions should be documented (as an ADR or otherwise) in the private `TSC-private` repository.


## Other Project Roles

The JSON Schema project recognizes the need for both technical and non-technical roles. While the JSON Schema project has no legal entity nor is housed within an entity which can take on business responsibilities, the TSC shall take on those responsibilities as much is as feasible. There are other non-technical responsibilities

The TSC will look to create other roles as appropriate, and may update this document in accordance with the requirements for doing so, to formally recognize the additional roles.

The following responsibilities are recognized as those requiring roles to be defined by the TSC:
- Community and Industry connections
- Brand awareness, recognition, and health
- Education and training

---

This work is a derivative of the [WebdriverIO Project Governance Model](https://github.com/webdriverio/webdriverio/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md).

Inspired by https://seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus, https://seedsforchange.org.uk/quickconsensus
Informed by https://www.ic.org/busting-the-myth-that-consensus-with-unanimity-is-good-for-communities/

This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/uk/).