Updates to change/governance process

[josee-sabourin]

In response to issue 163, we are hoping to move forward with updating our change process. This document outlines the current change process as per the repo, the proposed change process in issue 163, the de facto change process we have been more or less following, as well as what MobilityData would recommend.

One of our open questions is whether or not to include a deadline for implementing an RC, or how long something should remain an RC. There are instances of changes taking a considerable amount of time to be implemented. We understand that resources may be reduced due to COVID-19 which may cause delay, which is why we wanted to discuss whether or not a deadline would be beneficial or if it would create added stress and complications. Further, what would be the process if that deadline wasn't met?

Please let us know your thoughts on this proposed process as well as on the question above!

[matt-wirtz]

Hello!

I went quickly over the proposed modification of the change process. Sounds to me surprisingly rigid. The time frame for votes e.g. of just one week is rather tight.

The implementation requirement for having changes moved from RC to release kept me wondering. So the proposed changes first need to be implemented by one producer and one consumer in order to be moved to the official release. Tracking the implementation on the producer side seems straight forward. Just check the feed they produce. But on the consumer side it doesn't make sense to me. How do you track if the changes were implemented. A consumer doesn't produce a feed and not necessarily is the software available on github. Sounds to me more like a rhetorical question.

And what about votes against a proposed change? Do they count at all?

Maybe the proposed modification of the change process becomes clearer to me if you could elaborate a little bit better what the relevant lessons from GTFS were/are. I didn't follow GTFS closely enough so it would be helpful to understand what the issues were and when & how they were fixed. Thx.

[mplsmitch]

Is a simple majority enough to move forward with a proposal? Suppose a proposed change receives 10 votes in favor and 9 against, does it pass? What happens in the case of a tie?

The proposal makes clear that "Anyone can call for a vote" but doesn't define who can make a proposal (anyone?) or if there are any voting requirements. Can anyone vote or do they need to be affiliated with a producer or consumer? Can multiple representatives of an organization vote on a proposal or would organizations be limited to a single vote?

[josee-sabourin]

Hi all!
We've updated the proposal to answer questions and comments from the community, the proposal document linked above and here has also been updated with more information about the origins of GBFS governance as it relates to GTFS. If you are interested in learning more about GTFS Governance, an explainer document on its history is coming soon.

Let us know if you have any questions or concerns!

@matt-wirtz @mplsmitch

[josee-sabourin]

I hereby call a vote on this proposal. Voting will be open for 7 full calendar days until 11:59PM UTC on Monday, November 9th, 2020.
Please vote for or against the proposal, and include the organization for which you are voting in your comment.

[cmonagle]

+1 on behalf of Transit.

[evansiroky]

+1 from IBI Group

[kanagy]

+1 from Google Maps

[josee-sabourin]

Given that this PR proposes extending voting time to 10 days, and the general support on the PR, we will use this PR as a "practice" on the extended voting period. Thus, voting will be open until 11:59PM UTC on Thursday, November 12th.

[jayjonsson]

+1 from Lime

[bhandzo]

+1 from Bird

[sfaubert1]

+1 from PBSC

[josee-sabourin]

The vote on this is now closed, and it passes!

Votes in favor:
Transit (consumer)
IBI (consumer)
Google Maps (consumer)
Lime (producer)
Bird (producer)
PBSC (producer)

No votes against.