Establishing a Governance Model for Data for Canada
Background
As the Data for Canada project expands, it is important to formalize a governance structure that ensures long-term sustainability and high-quality output. This discussion is inspired by the Evolving Zarr’s Governance update.
Governance Philosophy: The Middle Ground
The intent for this project is to avoid a Benevolent Dictator for Life (BDFL) model. However, maintaining high standards is paramount to prevent "sloppy code" or poor design choices from entering the disseminated data packages.
There is significant value in the model of ultimate authority seen in the Linux kernel—where strong technical opinions ensure the integrity of the ecosystem. We are looking for a middle ground: a structure that encourages community innovation while maintaining a strict "quality gate" managed by project maintainers.
Proposed Contribution Workflow
I am envisioning a "Curation-First" model where the community drives experimentation and maintainers ensure professional-grade execution.
- Ideation & Experimentation: Contributors are encouraged to explore new ideas, experiment with data structures, and propose additions.
- Maintainer Review & Refinement: Once a concept is proven, project maintainers will take the lead on "cleaning up" the contribution. This ensures that every package brought into the main project meets our rigorous standards.
- Standardization: Maintainers will be responsible for ensuring that all data fits into the "4th dimension" and adheres to the project's requirements for modern file formats and metadata.
Discussion Points
- How can we best define the boundary between community experimentation and official maintainer refinement?
- What specific standards should be mandatory before a data package is considered "disseminated"?
- How do we ensure the maintainer role remains a facilitator of quality rather than a bottleneck for innovation?
Establishing a Governance Model for Data for Canada
Background
As the Data for Canada project expands, it is important to formalize a governance structure that ensures long-term sustainability and high-quality output. This discussion is inspired by the Evolving Zarr’s Governance update.
Governance Philosophy: The Middle Ground
The intent for this project is to avoid a Benevolent Dictator for Life (BDFL) model. However, maintaining high standards is paramount to prevent "sloppy code" or poor design choices from entering the disseminated data packages.
There is significant value in the model of ultimate authority seen in the Linux kernel—where strong technical opinions ensure the integrity of the ecosystem. We are looking for a middle ground: a structure that encourages community innovation while maintaining a strict "quality gate" managed by project maintainers.
Proposed Contribution Workflow
I am envisioning a "Curation-First" model where the community drives experimentation and maintainers ensure professional-grade execution.
Discussion Points