Adding the initial notes for the Governance planning

[malvikasharan]

Summary

Partially addresses #2035

• Add the sections and bullet points for the Governance plan

List of changes proposed in this PR (pull-request)

• Adding a draft file for the governance
• Will archive some outdated files from the project management folder

What should a reviewer concentrate their feedback on?

• What is missing from the current structure
• Everything looks ok?

Acknowledging contributors

• All contributors to this pull request are already named in the table of contributors in the README file.
• The following people should be added to the table of contributors in the README file:

[netlify]

❌ Deploy Preview for the-turing-way failed.

🔨 Explore the source changes: 97d0dc8

🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/the-turing-way/deploys/61f82aea17e6a700072afc09

[sgibson91]

Just wanted to bring in my point from Slack, though not entirely sure where it fits in to this document specifically.

Leaders of working groups or any group working on a specific effort need a lightweight process by which to surface proposals/requests for feedback to the steering committee/appropriate governance body to assess whether the impact of a particular project-wide change is within the Turing Way's values and in the best interests of the projects.

A couple of discussions I've been involved in where knowing the stance of the core team would have been helpful include:

• Should the Turing Way website have it's own domain name?
• How do we handle the growing size of the repo? Which technical solution solves the problem without being too technical that we isolate a vast majority of the community?

Project Jupyter has Jupyter Enhancement Proposals as their process - though I do not think this is in anyway "lightweight", so not the greatest example.

[aleesteele]

Planning to work on some of these governance issues during the May book dash, referencing additional work being done at OLS: open-life-science/ols-5#31