Add governance document for the DANDI Archive Project

[kabilar]

• This document should apply to all DANDI sites, DANDI GitHub organizations, and all their repositories:
  • https://dandiarchive.org
  • https://about.dandiarchive.org
  • https://hub.dandiarchive.org
  • https://github.com/dandi
  • https://github.com/dandisets
  • https://github.com/dandizarrs
• Based on example governance documents from other projects:
  • https://bids.neuroimaging.io/collaboration/governance.html?h=governance
  • https://github.com/nebari-dev/governance
  • https://github.com/cncf/project-template/blob/main/GOVERNANCE-subprojects.md
• Once approved, update the following in the document:
  • Effective Date
  • Status

[satra]

some suggestions for the doc. mostly to create separation between policy and implementation.

[satra]

could have a reference to sociocracy. one consideration is whether relevant voices have been heard. i.e. should the change be announced somewhere on a project roadmap or board.

[kabilar]

could have a reference to sociocracy.

Thanks. I have update the Core Principles section with this statement.

[kabilar]

one consideration is whether relevant voices have been heard. i.e. should the change be announced somewhere on a project roadmap or board.

We welcome input from the broader community. Currently, changes are announced through pull requests and the subsequent release notes. Using GitHub project boards and Google Docs/Sheets project roadmaps haven't worked for our team in the past. So we currently use our Google Docs meeting minutes that are public to also track developments. Is there a different tool or process that you would like us to try out?

[satra]

this seems more implementation than policy. perhaps that's a consideration in going through this document to separate policy from example implementation. the implementation could be an example of some policy on how we will do it in dandi.

[kabilar]

Thanks. I tend to lean towards implementation specifics when writing. Could you share an example or two of how you'd phrase these as policy statements? That would help me apply a consistent approach across the document.

[waxlamp]

This looks good ovverall (especially as a starting point, if we wish to flesh things out later). Some comments/questions:

1. The text starting in Section 6 or so becomes quite terse, with sentence fragments in bullet points expressing the general ideas associated with those concepts. I think these can use some more detail and precision.
2. As I mentioned in one of the comments below, a lot of the role/responsibility/process groupings of bullet points seem like summaries or examples of that entity, rather than an exhaustive definition. This is fine, but we should be more explicit about that if that's the intent.
3. What is the overall purpose of this document? If it's to bind behavior and process, then I don't think it has enough detail. If it's to transmit an overall idea of how the project runs, then I think it's useful. (I don't have enough experience with governance documents, or governance in general, to understand this fully.)

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for dandi-docs ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	fc1200f
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/dandi-docs/deploys/6a0b86ff617e7900081f1e62
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-204--dandi-docs.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[kabilar]

What is the overall purpose of this document? If it's to bind behavior and process, then I don't think it has enough detail. If it's to transmit an overall idea of how the project runs, then I think it's useful. (I don't have enough experience with governance documents, or governance in general, to understand this fully.)

Hi @waxlamp, I think under ideal scenarios it is the former, but it will likely end up being somewhere in between the former and the latter. Happy to apply further suggestions, thanks.