Problem
CONTRIBUTORS.md contains a single name and there's no documented governance: who the maintainers are, how decisions get made, how someone becomes a maintainer, and how the public blueprint repository is curated. For a project explicitly aiming to be "community-driven," this is a notable maturity gap.
Proposed change
- Add a
GOVERNANCE.md (or a Governance section in a MAINTAINERS.md) describing: current maintainers, decision-making model, how to escalate, and release/curation responsibilities
- Establish a lightweight, repeatable way to keep
CONTRIBUTORS.md current (e.g. all-contributors bot, or a documented manual policy)
- Clarify how community-submitted blueprints are reviewed and accepted (ties into the blueprint-proposal issue template)
Acceptance criteria
Problem
CONTRIBUTORS.mdcontains a single name and there's no documented governance: who the maintainers are, how decisions get made, how someone becomes a maintainer, and how the public blueprint repository is curated. For a project explicitly aiming to be "community-driven," this is a notable maturity gap.Proposed change
GOVERNANCE.md(or a Governance section in aMAINTAINERS.md) describing: current maintainers, decision-making model, how to escalate, and release/curation responsibilitiesCONTRIBUTORS.mdcurrent (e.g. all-contributors bot, or a documented manual policy)Acceptance criteria