Merge pull request #4 from nodejs/adds-governance

Adds GOVERNANCE.md

Author: mikeal

GOVERNANCE.md

@@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
+# Project Governance
+
+## Working Group
+
+All of the Node.js Foundation websites, including this repo, are jointly governed
+by a Working Group (WG). The WG is responsible for high-level guidance of this and
+related projects which include:
+
+- [nodejs/iojs.org](https://github.com/nodejs/iojs.org) published to https://iojs.org
+- [nodejs/new.nodejs.org](https://github.com/nodejs/iojs.org) published to https://new.nodejs.org
+- [joyent/node-website](https://github.com/joyent/node-website) published to https://nodejs.org
+
+The Website WG has final authority over this project including:
+
+* Technical direction
+* Project governance and process (including this policy)
+* Contribution policy
+* GitHub repository hosting
+* Conduct guidelines
+* Maintaining the list of additional Collaborators
+
+For the current list of WG members, see the project
+[README.md](./README.md#current-project-team-members).
+
+## Collaborators
+
+The [nodejs/new.nodejs.org](https://github.com/nodejs/new.nodejs.org)
+GitHub repository is maintained by the WG and additional Collaborators who are
+added by the WG on an ongoing basis.
+
+Individuals making significant and valuable contributions are made
+Collaborators and given commit-access to the project. These
+individuals are identified by the WG and their addition as
+Collaborators is discussed during the weekly WG meeting.
+
+_Note:_ If you make a significant contribution and are not considered
+for commit-access log an issue or contact a WG member directly and it
+will be brought up in the next WG meeting.
+
+Modifications of the contents of the `nodejs/new.nodejs.org` repository are made on
+a collaborative basis. Anybody with a GitHub account may propose a
+modification via pull request and it will be considered by the project
+Collaborators. All pull requests must be reviewed and accepted by a
+Collaborator with sufficient expertise who is able to take full
+responsibility for the change. In the case of pull requests proposed
+by an existing Collaborator, an additional Collaborator is required
+for sign-off. Consensus should be sought if additional Collaborators
+participate and there is disagreement around a particular
+modification. See _Consensus Seeking Process_ below for further detail
+on the consensus model used for governance.
+
+Collaborators may opt to elevate significant or controversial
+modifications, or modifications that have not found consensus to the
+WG for discussion by assigning the ***WG-agenda*** tag to a pull
+request or issue. The WG should serve as the final arbiter where
+required.
+
+For the current list of Collaborators, see the project
+[README.md](./README.md#current-project-team-members).
+
+## WG Membership
+
+WG seats are not time-limited.  There is no fixed size of the WG.
+However, the expected target is between 6 and 12, to ensure adequate
+coverage of important areas of expertise, balanced with the ability to
+make decisions efficiently.
+
+There is no specific set of requirements or qualifications for WG
+membership beyond these rules.
+
+The WG may add additional members to the WG by unanimous consensus.
+
+A WG member may be removed from the WG by voluntary resignation, or by
+unanimous consensus of all other WG members.
+
+Changes to WG membership should be posted in the agenda, and may be
+suggested as any other agenda item (see "WG Meetings" below).
+
+If an addition or removal is proposed during a meeting, and the full
+WG is not in attendance to participate, then the addition or removal
+is added to the agenda for the subsequent meeting.  This is to ensure
+that all members are given the opportunity to participate in all
+membership decisions.  If a WG member is unable to attend a meeting
+where a planned membership decision is being made, then their consent
+is assumed.
+
+No more than 1/3 of the WG members may be affiliated with the same
+employer.  If removal or resignation of a WG member, or a change of
+employment by a WG member, creates a situation where more than 1/3 of
+the WG membership shares an employer, then the situation must be
+immediately remedied by the resignation or removal of one or more WG
+members affiliated with the over-represented employer(s).
+
+## WG Meetings
+
+The WG meets weekly on a Google Hangout On Air. The meeting is run by
+a designated moderator approved by the WG. Each meeting should be
+published to YouTube.
+
+Items are added to the WG agenda which are considered contentious or
+are modifications of governance, contribution policy, WG membership,
+or release process.
+
+The intention of the agenda is not to approve or review all patches,
+that should happen continuously on GitHub and be handled by the larger
+group of Collaborators.
+
+Any community member or contributor can ask that something be added to
+the next meeting's agenda by logging a GitHub Issue. Any Collaborator,
+WG member or the moderator can add the item to the agenda by adding
+the ***WG-agenda*** tag to the issue.
+
+Prior to each WG meeting the moderator will share the Agenda with
+members of the WG. WG members can add any items they like to the
+agenda at the beginning of each meeting. The moderator and the WG
+cannot veto or remove items.
+
+The WG may invite persons or representatives from certain projects to
+participate in a non-voting capacity.
+
+The moderator is responsible for summarizing the discussion of each
+agenda item and send it as a pull request after the meeting.
+
+## Consensus Seeking Process
+
+The WG follows a
+[Consensus Seeking](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus-seeking_decision-making)
+decision making model.
+
+When an agenda item has appeared to reach a consensus the moderator
+will ask "Does anyone object?" as a final call for dissent from the
+consensus.
+
+If an agenda item cannot reach a consensus a WG member can call for
+either a closing vote or a vote to table the issue to the next
+meeting. The call for a vote must be seconded by a majority of the WG
+or else the discussion will continue. Simple majority wins.
+
+Note that changes to WG membership require unanimous consensus.  See
+"WG Membership" above.