Community Governance

ChronoZoom is an open source, community-run project.

A meritocracy model is used to govern the project’s needs, objectives and future goals.

Core team

The core team is responsible for strategic planning, release planning, and approving changes to the governance model. It also makes decisions when community consensus cannot be reached.

The core team is open to anyone who wishes to join.

The core team currently consists of developers, testers and at least one representative from each of the current main university and industry partners.

Communication

A public Skype group chat is used as the primary method to facilitate communication.

Please send an email to chronozoom-core@googlegroups.com to be added to the group chat.

We also have a mailing list for developers and the core team:

chronozoom-core@googlegroups.com

chronozoom-dev@googlegroups.com

Decision-making

Decisions are made default by lazy consensus.

Lazy consensus is a process which allows a large group of people to efficiently reach consensus, as someone with no objections to a proposal need not spend time stating their position, and others need not spend time reading such mails.

Voting can be used in situations when lazy consensus would not be suitable or effective, such as major strategic plan changes, or changes to the governance model.

Transparency

Decision-making is made in a transparent, open fashion. No decisions about the project’s direction, bug fixes or features may be done without community involvement and participation.

Contributors

Contributors are community members who submit patches to the project. Expectations are that they will submit patches that are small at first and will only grow larger once the contributor has built confidence in the quality of their patches.

Platform Committer

The committer decides on whether patches are entered into the main code repository. The committer will use lazy consensus to decide on whether to commit a patch from a contributor. If the discussion is no longer moving towards a consensus, the core team can hold a vote.

This document is based on work by the Outercurve Foundation
http://www.outercurve.org/Resources/Wiki/Page/Committee-Governance

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *