paperless-gpt/GOVERNANCE.md

Project Governance

This document outlines the governance model for the paperless-gpt project. It describes how decisions are made and how community members can participate in project development.

Project Roles

Users

• People who use paperless-gpt
• Can submit bug reports and feature requests
• Can contribute to discussions
• Can help other users

Contributors

• Users who contribute to the project
• Submit pull requests
• Improve documentation
• Help with testing
• Participate in issue discussions

Maintainers

• Review and merge pull requests
• Manage issues and project boards
• Guide technical direction
• Ensure code quality
• Help onboard new contributors
• Responsibilities:
  • Respond to issues and PRs
  • Review code changes
  • Maintain documentation
  • Ensure tests pass
  • Release new versions
  • Uphold code of conduct

Project Lead

• Final decision maker for project direction
• Sets technical standards
• Manages maintainer team
• Oversees releases
• Current lead: @icereed

Decision Making

Technical Decisions

1. Discussion Phase

   • Open an issue for discussion
   • Gather community feedback
   • Consider alternatives
   • Document trade-offs

2. Implementation Phase

   • Create detailed proposal
   • Submit pull request
   • Address review feedback
   • Update documentation

3. Review Process

   • At least one maintainer review
   • Automated tests must pass
   • Documentation must be updated
   • Breaking changes require extra scrutiny

Project Direction

1. Long-term Planning

   • Quarterly roadmap updates
   • Community feedback periods
   • Clear communication of goals
   • Published milestones

2. Feature Acceptance

   • Must align with project goals
   • Consider maintenance burden
   • Evaluate user benefit
   • Check implementation feasibility

Release Process

1. Version Planning

   • Follow semantic versioning
   • Document all changes
   • Update dependencies
   • Security review

2. Release Preparation

   • Create release branch
   • Run test suite
   • Update changelog
   • Draft release notes

3. Release Publication

   • Tag version in repository
   • Publish to registries
   • Announce to community
   • Monitor for issues

Communication

Channels

• GitHub Issues: Bug reports, feature requests
• GitHub Discussions: General discussion
• Pull Requests: Code changes
• Discord: Community chat
• Email: Security issues

Guidelines

• Be respectful and professional
• Stay on topic
• English is the working language
• Document decisions and rationale
• Keep security issues private

Contributing

Process

1. Getting Started

   • Read contribution guidelines
   • Set up development environment
   • Understand code structure
   • Pick starter issues

2. Making Changes

   • Create feature branch
   • Follow code style
   • Write tests
   • Update docs

3. Submitting Changes

   • Create pull request
   • Fill out template
   • Respond to reviews
   • Keep changes focused

Standards

• Follow code style guide
• Include tests
• Update documentation
• Sign commits
• One feature per PR

Code Review

Requirements

• At least one maintainer approval
• All tests passing
• Documentation updated
• Code style compliance
• No security issues

Process

1. Automated Checks

   • Linting
   • Tests
   • Coverage
   • Dependencies

2. Manual Review

   • Code quality
   • Architecture
   • Security
   • Performance

3. Final Checks

   • Merge conflicts
   • Documentation
   • Breaking changes
   • Version updates

Issue Management

Categories

• Bug: Software defects
• Feature: New functionality
• Enhancement: Improvements
• Documentation: Doc changes
• Question: User queries

Priority Levels

1. Critical

   • Security issues
   • Major bugs
   • Blocking issues

2. High

   • Important features
   • User experience issues
   • Performance problems

3. Normal

   • Regular enhancements
   • Minor bugs
   • Documentation updates

4. Low

   • Nice-to-have features
   • Style improvements
   • Non-critical fixes

Project Changes

Governance Changes

• Open for community discussion
• Two week comment period
• Maintainer consensus required
• Project lead approval needed

Role Changes

• Based on consistent contributions
• Maintainer nomination
• Community feedback
• Project lead approval

Success Metrics

Project Health

• Issue resolution time
• PR merge time
• Test coverage
• Documentation quality
• Community engagement

Code Quality

• Automated metrics
• Review thoroughness
• Test coverage
• Documentation completeness
• Security standards

This governance model is a living document and may be updated as the project evolves. Changes will be proposed and discussed with the community before implementation.