Governance

rfcs/NNNN-governance.md

@@ -0,0 +1,294 @@
+---
+Status: Active
+Champions: smalls
+PR: {{ update_with_pr_number }}
+---
+
+# Governance
+
+Update & clarify Lit's governance model
+
+## Objective
+
+The Lit project works toward a better, lower-friction web platform by promoting
+interoperable standards for existing and emergent developer needs, and
+fostering an open and healthy ecosystem around these standards.
+
+We'd like to apply these same values to our project. In this RFC, we propose
+updating the Lit governance model (documented primarily in a new file,
+`GOVERNANCE.md`) to make it clear that our community members have an important
+role in deciding the future of Lit. While Google owns and operates the Lit
+project repo, project roles are open to all contributors.
+
+### Goals
+
+To codify and document Lit's governance model.
+
+### Non-Goals
+
+Anything outside of that scope.
+
+## Motivation
+
+See [#Objective](Objective).
+
+## Detailed Design
+
+If this RFC is accepted, we will propose a PR in the main
+[https://github.com/lit/lit](Lit repo) for further iteration, using the
+language here as a starting point. This RFC also includes initial lists of
+Members and Maintainers which will become `MEMBERS.md` and `MAINTAINERS.md` in
+the PR.
+
+### GOVERNANCE.md Contents
+
+#### Mission, Vision, Values
+
+We seek to build a better, lower-friction web platform by promoting
+interoperable standards for existing and emergent developer needs. Whereas most
+web frameworks ask "how might we best solve this developer need in userspace?",
+on the Lit project we ask "how might this need be met by a new interoperable
+standard, either as a new web platform feature or as a shared protocol
+implementable by any framework?" As a corollary, our library development is
+very tightly linked to developments in browser standards/implementation,
+building on long-term relationships with Chrome, the W3C, community groups,
+etc.
+
+A key tenent of our decision-making framework involves applying this "ethos" of
+standards-based interoperability to questions of features, roadmap, and
+prioritization – and this tenent is both a core value and a key differentiator
+of Lit. Decisions at all levels (from release planning to approving new
+features) are judged through this lens.
+
+We strive for transparency in our decision making and regularly look to the
+project community for feedback. The Lit project repo is currently owned and
+managed by Google; however project membership and Maintainer status is open to
+all contributors of the project. Project roles and responsibilities are given
+to the people, not their employer. This includes members of the Lit team at
+Google; not all members of the team will be project Members or Maintainers, and
+they will go through the process outlined here to achieve additional roles.
+
+#### How We Work
+
+Lit strives to operate in the open, with full transparency to all members of
+our community.
+
+##### Issues and Tasks
+
+These are tracked in Github and visible to all. We hold weekly engineering (see
+our [calendar](https://lit.dev/community-calendar/)) meetings where Members and
+Maintainers review progress and discuss open topics. 
+
+##### Features / Substantial Changes
+
+Lit uses a Request for Comment process (RFC) to evaluate substantial changes to
+the project, including governance.  Any community member may open an RFC, and
+we welcome input from all. Approval of them is limited to Maintainers; an RFC
+is approved when more than half of all Maintainers vote to approve the RFC.
+
+##### Releases
+
+The project uses a monorepo that is generally in a state such that it can be
+released at any time. Releases are typically done at ad-hoc intervals based on
+the need/desire to publish specific fixes and features. Major version changes
+are rare and are done with large community awareness and outreach.
+
+The release process is driven by the Maintainers of Lit.
+
+##### Communication
+
+Github is our “source of truth” for project discussions and decisions. At times
+when a quick answer is needed, we have a Discord available for chat. We
+recognize that chat is ephemeral and therefore you may be asked to create an
+issue or RFC for the question you raise. This is so that all in the community
+are able to be involved in the discussion, and decisions are not made in silos,
+and so we have durable records of the discussions and decisions reached.  
+
+#### Contributors
+
+In order to facilitate contributions at different levels, we have set up
+different project roles at various levels of involvement. Community members
+generally start at the first levels of the "ladder" and advance up it as their
+responsibilities grow. A key attribute of contributors at each level is helping
+others in the community - reviewing their code, helping them to use Lit,
+recognizing when their contributions warrant a new role in the project.
+
+We value transparency and openness in the Lit project, and as a result on the
+rare occasion that exceptions must be made to this incremental progression
+(e.g., a new Maintainer is urgently needed or a new sub-project is accepted) we
+will still follow the open process for joining at the required level. 
+
+We do not expect this to be a static list of roles - as Lit continues to
+evolve, so will our project needs. We will leverage our RFC process to propose
+these changes.
+
+##### User
+
+Our users are the most important role of Lit - without users, Lit is not
+useful. Anyone can be a user and there are no special requirements.
+
+We do encourage our users to interact with our broader community. Feedback
+about successes is wonderful, as is hearing about how Lit could do better. Some
+other ways that Users can support the project: By trying pre-releases and
+giving us feedback Discussing Lit by word of mouth, in your communities, and
+your projects Supporting others in the community By making new components, and
+sharing them with the community Showing off apps that are built with Lit
+
+We love to hear how our users are being successful with Lit. We have a special
+[Showcase](https://discord.com/channels/1012791295170859069/1014310579852300439)
+Discord channel especially for this purpose.
+
+We ask that all of our users follow our [Code of
+Conduct](https://github.com/lit/lit/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) when
+interacting with the project.
+
+##### Contributor
+
+A Contributor contributes directly to the project in some way. These
+contributions don’t have to be code, but they can be - commenting on PRs,
+filing issues, presenting at a community event are all contributions. Github
+tracks code Contributors on a [contributors
+list](https://github.com/lit/lit/graphs/contributors), but please keep in mind
+this is not the exhaustive list of project contributors.
+
+When making a contribution, please follow our [Contribution
+Guide](https://github.com/lit/lit/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md).
+
+##### Member
+
+A Member of the Lit project is a Contributor with recognized, consistent
+contributions to the project. They are actively pushing to the project, and
+have enhanced permissions to enable this. They are likely to have an area of
+focus (eg expertise with a Lit subsystem, our docs/lit.dev site, etc), or they
+may have general expertise across the Lit codebase.
+
+Members are eligible for enhanced GitHub permissions (GitHub Write and
+[CODEOWNERS](https://github.com/lit/lit/blob/main/.github/CODEOWNERS)) for
+their area of focus.
+
+We ask that our Members continue to support and mentor our Contributors, to
+help them grow into Members as well. This includes prioritizing reviews, and
+providing good feedback on those reviews. When a Member believes that an
+individual is ready to join the Members list, they should nominate them (by
+creating a PR to amend `MEMBERS.md`); a majority Maintainers are required to
+approve that PR.
+
+##### Maintainer
+
+Maintainers are very established contributors who are responsible for the
+entire project. 
+
+They have the ability to approve PRs against any area of the project, and are
+expected to participate in making decisions about the strategy and priorities
+of the project. Maintainers are responsible for voting on RFCs, and may have
+enhanced GitHub permissions (like GitHub Maintain) if needed.
+
+We ask that our Maintainers support and mentor our Contributors and Members, to
+help them grow into Maintainers as well. This includes prioritizing reviews,
+and providing good feedback on proposals and RFCs. When a Member believes that
+an individual is ready to join the Maintainers list, they should nominate them
+(by creating a PR to amend `MAINTAINERS.md`). A majority of all Maintainers are
+required to approve the PR adding the new Maintainer.
+
+##### Stepping Down / Removal
+
+If and when a Member or Maintainer’s commitment levels change, they can
+consider stepping down (moving down the contributor ladder) or moving to
+emeritus status (completely stepping away from the project).
+
+Contact the Maintainers about changing to Emeritus status, or reducing your
+contributor level.
+
+##### Involuntary Removal or Demotion
+
+Involuntary removal/demotion of a contributor happens when responsibilities and
+requirements aren't being met. This may include repeated patterns of
+inactivity, extended period of inactivity, a period of failing to meet the
+requirements of your role, and/or a violation of the Code of Conduct. This
+process is important because it protects the community and its deliverables
+while also opens up opportunities for new contributors to step in.
+
+Involuntary removal or demotion is handled through a vote by a majority of the
+current Maintainers.
+
+# Technical Steering Committee
+To gather needs, prioritization, and insight from our key partners and
+large-scale users, Lit will form a Technical Steering Committee (TSC). This
+will be a parallel organization to our User, Contributor, Member, Maintainer
+ladder specified [above](#Contributor).
+
+Members of the TSC will join quarterly sessions with the Maintainers where
+we’ll review what the team has accomplished, discuss new initiatives, and
+overall project strategy. The Maintainers (or other project Members) may also
+ask for advice from one or more of the TSC members, or as a second opinion if
+there are technical or strategic decisions that must be made.
+
+As the day-to-day responsibilities rest with the Maintainers, approving new
+members of the TSC is done by a majority of Maintainers, as are involuntary
+removal or demotion (if needed).
+
+### Proposed `MEMBERS.md`
+
+43081j
+bencbradshaw
+benjamind
+bennypowers
+bicknellr
+usergenic
+
+### Proposed `MAINTAINERS.md`
+
+aomarks
+AndrewJakubowicz
+augustjk
+dfreedm
+e111077
+graynorton
+justinfagnani
+kevinpschaaf
+rictic
+sorvell
+
+## Implementation Considerations
+
+### Implementation Plan
+
+The core of this change will be a single PR to the main Lit repository.
+
+Other aspects will involve gradual changes in our processes - as more community
+members join our Maintainers, and as we gather feedback from these new Members
+and Maintainers, the project will grow and evolve to accomodate them.
+
+### Backward Compatibility
+
+There are no backwards compatibility concerns.
+
+### Testing Plan
+
+This proposal will be tested live.
+
+### Performance and Code Size Impact
+
+None.
+
+### Interoperability
+
+N/A
+
+### Security Impact
+
+N/A
+
+### Documentation Plan
+
+No documentation needs to be added.
+
+## Downsides
+
+We don't believe there are any downsides to this plan.
+
+## Alternatives
+
+The obvious alternative would be to leave governance as it is today. However,
+we believe that this change is positive - see [#Objective](Objective) for the
+motivation.