-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Establish OSS Operating Principles (closes #25) #27
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
+70
−0
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ | ||
| # Open Source Committee Operating Principles | ||
|
|
||
| > These are the committee's day-to-day working rules of engagement. Per issue | ||
| > #25, they live in the repo as version-controlled markdown at | ||
| > `docs/operating-guidelines/operating-principles.md`, amended via pull request. | ||
| > | ||
| > Authority chain: these principles sit below the Committee Charter | ||
| > (`committee-charter.md`, issue #9) and the Agentics Foundation mission and | ||
| > vision above them, and above the mechanical OSS Intake Process below them. They | ||
| > are meant to mature into testable definitions over time through tracked issues, | ||
| > not to swell into a fixed document. Where these principles and the canonical | ||
| > governance document differ, the governance document and the Board govern. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Purpose | ||
|
|
||
| These principles guide how the Open Source Committee operates day-to-day. They | ||
| sit below the Foundation mission and the committee charter, and above the | ||
| mechanical intake process. They are meant to mature into testable definitions | ||
| over time rather than to be a fixed charter. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Principles | ||
|
|
||
| 1. **Humans judge, agents execute.** (AF-GOV-002) Agents provide analysis, | ||
| logistics, case briefs, and infrastructure. Agents never cast votes, decide | ||
| escalation, or propose retraction. The committee's human judgment is the | ||
| point; automation makes that judgment efficient and well-informed. | ||
|
|
||
| 2. **Issues over documents.** Decisions, action items, and working artifacts live | ||
| as tracked GitHub issues with named owners, not as prose in meeting notes or | ||
| static docs. If it matters, it has an issue number. | ||
|
|
||
| 3. **The governance doc is the source of truth.** Where implementation diverges | ||
| from the canonical intake rules, the doc wins. Code changes follow doc | ||
| changes, not the reverse. | ||
|
|
||
| 4. **Repos are learning resources, not just libraries.** Given how fast code is | ||
| now generated, the committee's value is guidance and balances for the | ||
| ecosystem, including security and provenance, not raw volume. | ||
|
|
||
| 5. **Member-only, mission-aligned intake.** Submissions come from members in good | ||
| standing, are open source with a clear license, and advance the agentic AI | ||
| ecosystem. Incomplete or non-compliant submissions may be declined without | ||
| review. | ||
|
|
||
| 6. **Two-step, simple-majority voting.** Escalation vote, then validation vote; | ||
| a simple majority of members voting. Submitters do not vote on their own | ||
| submission or its retraction. | ||
|
|
||
| 7. **Tiered stewardship.** T1 Foundation-Owned, T2 Foundation-Endorsed (approved | ||
| through intake, listed on the website), T3 Community-Associated. Tier names | ||
| remain open for discussion (#10). | ||
|
|
||
| 8. **Auditability by default.** Every status change, score, and vote leaves a | ||
| durable trail in the issue and the attestation log. No decisions in DMs. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Open questions to mature next | ||
|
|
||
| - Concrete acceptance thresholds per category (donation vs listing vs support). | ||
| - CLA / DCO / IP-transfer instrument before any real donation completes (gates | ||
| the SummaryBot #33 pilot and any future donation; needs legal counsel). | ||
| - Snyk / package-risk evaluation as a standardized pre-review check. | ||
| - Definition of "agentic AI ecosystem" scope. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Relationship to the charter | ||
|
|
||
| The charter (`committee-charter.md`, issue #9) defines mission and organizational | ||
|
michaeloboyle marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
| scope, flowing from the Agentics Foundation profile README. These operating | ||
| principles are the committee's working rules of engagement underneath that | ||
| charter. They are kept short and accrete testable definitions through issues | ||
| rather than swelling into a document. | ||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.