Welcome to the Open Science Framework (OSF) Community Governance Document. This document defines the governance structure, decision-making processes, and community norms to ensure inclusive, transparent, and effective collaboration among OSF contributors. These governance policies are designed to remain stable over time while adapting to community needs.
The OSF community is committed to maintaining and enhancing an open-source research management platform that fosters transparency, reproducibility, and collaboration in research across all disciplines.
- Openness and Transparency – Governance decisions are made openly and documented for public access, ensuring that all stakeholders can participate in decision-making.
- Diversity and Inclusion – We cultivate a welcoming environment for contributors of all backgrounds, perspectives, and expertise.
- Collaboration and Respect – Constructive discussions, active listening, and mutual respect form the foundation of our community.
- Sustainability and Stability – Governance structures should be enduring, with the flexibility to adapt to evolving community needs and technological advancements.
- Community Empowerment – The OSF community is encouraged to contribute, propose improvements, and engage in shaping the platform's future.
-
OSF Users: Individuals or organizations utilizing OSF for research and collaboration. Users provide feedback, report bugs, and suggest features through OSF Support, office hours, or interviews with the COS Product Team.
- General OSF Users: Researchers, students, and institutions using OSF in their daily workflows.
- Power OSF Users: Highly engaged users who provide in-depth feedback, beta test new features, and serve as informal ambassadors as OSF technology advocates.
- Institutional OSF Users: Organizations and academic institutions integrating OSF into their research infrastructure and workflows. Find out more about institutional partners on OSF.
-
Contributors: Individuals actively participating in OSF’s development, including code contributions, documentation, community engagement, and user support.
- Code Contributors: Developers writing and reviewing code, fixing bugs, and developing new features.
- Documentation Contributors: Individuals improving guides, FAQs, onboarding materials, and technical documentation.
- Community Advocates: Members assisting new users, moderating discussions, and hosting community-driven events.
- Add-On Developers: Contributors building integrations and extensions to enhance OSF’s functionality.
-
Maintainers: Experienced contributors responsible for reviewing and merging contributions, managing releases, and guiding the project’s direction.
-
OSF Product Owners: COS staff members overseeing the prioritization and implementation of community-submitted issues and feature requests.
-
Steering Committee: The governing body responsible for providing recommendations to the COS product steering committee on OSF’s strategic direction, composed of senior maintainers, institutional representatives, and community leaders.
- Steering Committee Membership: Members are nominated and selected through community consensus. Membership is reviewed annually, with opportunities for new voices to be included.
- Decision-Making Process: Decisions are made by consensus whenever possible. If consensus cannot be reached, a structured voting process is used, with each Steering Committee member having one vote.
- Conflict Resolution: Disputes should be resolved through respectful dialogue. If unresolved, they may be escalated to the Steering Committee for mediation, with impartial third-party input if necessary.
- Stepping Down & Accountability: Maintainers and Steering Committee members may step down voluntarily, with a transition plan in place to ensure continuity and knowledge transfer.
- Issues of misconduct can be reported confidentially to the COS HR team (HR@cos.io) or designated community representatives.
- Reports should include relevant details and evidence where applicable.
- Communication channels for reporting include an online form, email, or direct outreach to community moderators.
- The HR team, in collaboration with an independent review panel, will assess reports in a timely manner.
- Investigations will be conducted impartially, with transparent outcomes where possible.
- Actions may include mediation, formal warnings, temporary suspensions, or removal from the community.
- All community members, including COS leadership, are held to the same behavioral standards outlined in the Code of Conduct.
- Regular reviews of the Code of Conduct enforcement ensure fairness, effectiveness, and community trust.
- The Steering Committee regularly reviews proposed projects and makes recommendations based on community needs and impact assessments.
- Feedback from contributors, institutional partners, and users is incorporated to ensure alignment with OSF’s mission and sustainability goals.
- Funded projects may include core platform development, infrastructure improvements, integrations, community outreach initiatives, and research support.
- Transparency in funding decisions is maintained through public reporting and open discussions.
- The Steering Committee meets quarterly with COS leadership to discuss roadmaps, funding opportunities, and resource distribution.
- While COS leadership retains the final say on financial decisions, the committee provides strategic input and represents the voice of the community.
- Mailing Lists: Official discussions, project updates, and governance notifications.
- Real-Time Communication: Platforms such as Discord (https://discord.gg/KDWasAks5y) for informal discussions, collaboration, and quick support.
- Note: The COS team works 9 am to 5 pm ET on weekdays, but other community members may offer faster support.
- Regular Office Hours: COS team members will support weekly office hours to discuss the project, blockers, and project-specific topics.
- Public Documentation: A centralized repository of governance policies, GitHub, and community documentation is available.
Governance policies should remain stable over time to maintain trust and continuity. However, when changes are necessary:
- Proposed amendments must be formally submitted to the Steering Committee for review.
- The community is given an opportunity to provide feedback through open discussions or surveys.
- Final approval of amendments follows a consensus-driven approach, with a formal vote if needed.
OSF may receive funding from grants, institutional partnerships, sponsorships, and community donations.
- Funds support platform maintenance, feature development, infrastructure, community events, and documentation improvements.
- COS manages and allocates resources transparently, with input from the Steering Committee and public accountability mechanisms.
Ongoing projects, plans, and timelines will be documented and made publicly accessible to ensure visibility into development priorities.
- Contributor Guide: Detailed guidelines on submitting pull requests, coding standards, and contributor onboarding.
- Development Roadmap: Comprehensive documentation of upcoming releases, feature prioritization, and long-term goals.
- Community Guidelines: Best practices for engagement, collaboration, and responsible participation in the OSF community.