Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
93 lines (51 loc) · 6.47 KB

GOVERNANCE.md

File metadata and controls

93 lines (51 loc) · 6.47 KB

Security Insights Project Governance

As a developing project, Security Insights aims to have a quick development cycle where decisions and community issues are resolved promptly while capturing the input of interested stakeholders.

Security Insights has no formal collegiate body in charge of steering. Decisions are guided by the consensus of community members who have achieved maintainer status.

While maintainer consensus shall be the process for decision making, all issues and proposals shall be governed by the project's guiding principles.

Guiding Governance Principles

Any issues or proposals brought to the project's maintainers shall be framed in the Security Insights guiding principles. Proposals not adhering to said principles shall not be considered for consensus.

Favor Simplicity

The goal of Security Insights is to create a minimal and efficient format that can be used with agility and be embeddable. Simple is better.

Ensure Stability

Any enhancements to the Security Insights spec and tooling must not break the working model of the specification. Changes to the description of a value are permissible, but changes that break the format or structure will have wide-ranging impacts and must be avoided unless absolutely necessary.

Cautious Incremental Improvement

New entries must be added with caution, and breaking changes should be extremely rare. The project does not have the luxury of frequent incremental improvements; therefore, each change must be carefully considered.

Security Insights Enhancement Proposals

To introduce a new feature or functional modification into the Security Insights specification, a user may open a Security Insights Enhancement Proposal (SIEP). Any SIEP opened by a community member who has achieved maintainer status shall be automatically open for discussion if the author so chooses.

SIEPs filed by non-maintainers need to be sponsored by a maintainer before being admitted for discussion.

SIEPs shall follow the structure set forth by the issue template in the Security Insights/community repository.

After a SIEP is accepted for discussion, it shall remain in under discussion status for no longer than 30 days, after which consensus will be recorded according to the maintainer consensus process.

Maintainer Consensus

Each Security Insights project (e.g., spec, tools, etc.) will have its own set of maintainers.

To reach a decision on an issue, proposal, or formal SIEP, the proponents need to seek maintainer consensus. In the context of this document, "maintainer consensus" means collecting a sufficient number of favorable opinions of community members with maintainer status in the relevant projects to move forward with a proposal.

This document does not prescribe a method of voting. Any mechanism that enables the collection of positive/negative votes associated with an identity may be used. Examples of this include voting through "thumbs up/down" emojis or with "+1" comments in issues.

Maintainer consensus shall be reached in the following circumstances:

  • Having a majority of favorable maintainer votes at the end of the proposal discussion term which may not be longer than thirty (30) days. The number of favorable opinions may never be less than two (2).
  • Achieving a favorable vote of more than 50% of the total active maintainers at any time during the discussion period.
  • In most cases, when the number of organizations with active maintainers in the project exceeds four (4), the total vote count shall include maintainers from at least two different organizations.
  • A quorum for a favorable vote for spec changes must include maintainers from at least two (2) organizations.
  • An exception to reaching maintainer consensus is when voting for proposals that modify the governance model (see below).

Note that when qualified, the proponents may add their favorable vote to count towards consensus but needs to be explicitly recorded in the voting mechanism.

Review Criteria for Security Insights Repositories

Any changes intended to be merged in the Security Insights repositories shall meet the following minimal criteria:

  • Commits must be signed off.
  • Pull requests must be approved by at least one of the project's maintainers.

Any repository under the Security Insights organization may impose additional requirements to approve pull requests as long as these minimal requirements are met.

Reaching Maintainer Status

Any community member can be considered as a candidate for maintainer status under the following conditions:

  • Any community member may self-nominate as a maintainer candidate after actively contributing to Security Insights constantly for six months or more.
  • A sponsoring committee of maintainers that meets the qualifying criteria may nominate a community member.

Sponsoring Committees

To nominate a community member as a maintainer candidate, a group of maintainers may file a nomination. The committee shall meet the following criteria to be qualified to file the nomination:

  • The number of members in the committee shall not be less than two (2).
  • Whenever the number of organizations with maintainers in the project is more than two (2), committee members shall be from different organizations.

Once the nomination is filed and deemed valid, the regular process for maintainer approval shall govern the decision to accept the candidate as a maintainer.

Emeritus Maintainers

Emeritus maintainers will be listed in a separate section on the Security Insights MAINTAINERS.md

A maintainer who is not currently active on the project may be given Emeritus status by default after six months of no activity, such as pull request interactions or GitHub Issue interactions. A maintainer may also assign themselves Emeritus status through a pull request.

A maintainer may become active from Emeritus status through maintainer consensus and a corresponding pull request.

Revisions to the Governance Model

The project's governance model shall be revisited every six months to address the needs of the community, as the project recognizes that communities need to steer themselves according to their size, members, and other factors that shape their complexity.

At any point, a Security Insights Enhancement Proposal may be opened to redefine the project's governance. To be accepted, governing model proposals shall be approved by a qualified majority consisting of a minimum of 66% favorable votes of all active maintainers.