Proposal for project charter

cgranade commented

2025-12-09 08:55:27 +01:00

Owner

This PR introduces a proposed charter for the rereading Project; if approved, this charter will form the basis for governance on all software and service development, social media activity, and other activities under the rereading Project.

This PR introduces a proposed charter for the **rereading** Project; if approved, this charter will form the basis for governance on all software and service development, social media activity, and other activities under the **rereading** Project.

cgranade added 1 commit

2025-12-09 08:55:28 +01:00

Draft version of project charter a8aa66e69b

msavoritias commented

2025-12-16 11:03:19 +01:00

First-time contributor

Hey, I saw the post on activitypub and I love the direction you are going. Software should be developed by and for the community.

I have been writing the Cooperative Development Guidelines to do exactly that. https://codeberg.org/Vojkruco/Cooperative_Development_Guidelines

They have a Code of Conduct, Mediation/Moderation (what you call Ethics) Guidelines, Governance, Decision Making and a WIP Circle Structure. Im not saying you have to use all of it or any of it. Maybe some of it inspires you or you copy some parts (its all under CC-0). Its used already by some communities as you can see and they have adapted the documents for their use.

Governance specifically is here https://codeberg.org/Vojkruco/Cooperative_Development_Guidelines/src/branch/main/Foundation/Governance/Governance.md

I personally am not fond of Committees or Boards that you mention, which is why I opted for a Circle Model but of course that is up to you. I am open for any questions here or on activitypub @[email protected]

Hey, I saw the post on activitypub and I love the direction you are going. Software should be developed by and for the community. I have been writing the Cooperative Development Guidelines to do exactly that. https://codeberg.org/Vojkruco/Cooperative_Development_Guidelines They have a Code of Conduct, Mediation/Moderation (what you call Ethics) Guidelines, Governance, Decision Making and a WIP Circle Structure. Im not saying you have to use all of it or any of it. Maybe some of it inspires you or you copy some parts (its all under CC-0). Its used already by some communities as you can see and they have adapted the documents for their use. Governance specifically is here https://codeberg.org/Vojkruco/Cooperative_Development_Guidelines/src/branch/main/Foundation/Governance/Governance.md I personally am not fond of Committees or Boards that you mention, which is why I opted for a Circle Model but of course that is up to you. I am open for any questions here or on activitypub @[email protected]

cgranade commented

2025-12-19 02:12:26 +01:00

Author

Owner

Thanks for the links! There's some really great ideas in there, I appreciate the pointer to more resources along the lines of circle models. I'd seen some discussion in the context of Sociocracy, which looks really neat for larger organizations, but might be difficult to implement on a smaller scale. The other reason I went with committee-based for this proposal was that it's a bit easier to work with 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(6) structures in the US with a committee-based governance, especially when considering Open Collective and other groups for supporting 501(c)(6) structures.

That said, whatever structure rereading Project adopts, I think some of those collaborative development principles like consent-focused development would be wonderful principles and policies to include!

Thanks for the links! There's some really great ideas in there, I appreciate the pointer to more resources along the lines of circle models. I'd seen some discussion in the context of [Sociocracy](https://www.sociocracyforall.org/), which looks really neat for larger organizations, but might be difficult to implement on a smaller scale. The other reason I went with committee-based for this proposal was that it's a bit easier to work with 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(6) structures in the US with a committee-based governance, especially when considering Open Collective and other groups for supporting 501(c)(6) structures. That said, whatever structure rereading Project adopts, I think some of those collaborative development principles like consent-focused development would be wonderful principles and policies to include!

cgranade referenced this pull request

2025-12-19 07:11:33 +01:00

Created folder structure for charter amendment proposals (CAPs) #2

msavoritias commented

2025-12-20 10:59:11 +01:00

First-time contributor

@cgranade wrote in #1 (comment):

Thanks for the links! There's some really great ideas in there, I appreciate the pointer to more resources along the lines of circle models. I'd seen some discussion in the context of Sociocracy, which looks really neat for larger organizations, but might be difficult to implement on a smaller scale.

That is exactly what we at Vojkruco we are trying to do! Have guides for projects from 1-3 people and larger. Vojkruco/Cooperative_Development_Guidelines#23 But its a work in progress now so of course I don't suggest to adopt it 😅 just that it can be done.

The other reason I went with committee-based for this proposal was that it's a bit easier to work with 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(6) structures in the US with a committee-based governance, especially when considering Open Collective and other groups for supporting 501(c)(6) structures.

Ah I didn't know it was that bad ☹️ Sociocracy does have a so-called Mission Circle, but its hard to adopt for software projects since the practical aspect is missing. Hopefully Vojkruco can write it down and provide guidance at some point.

That said, whatever structure rereading Project adopts, I think some of those collaborative development principles like consent-focused development would be wonderful principles and policies to include!

Thank you for the compliments 😊 Yeah even without the Circles I think the RFC Template and the governance or Code of Conduct or Decision Making have a lot of good things in there. Feel free to copy/adapt anything you want.

@cgranade wrote in https://codeberg.org/rereading/governance/pulls/1#issuecomment-9051786: > Thanks for the links! There's some really great ideas in there, I appreciate the pointer to more resources along the lines of circle models. I'd seen some discussion in the context of [Sociocracy](https://www.sociocracyforall.org/), which looks really neat for larger organizations, but might be difficult to implement on a smaller scale. That is exactly what we at Vojkruco we are trying to do! Have guides for projects from 1-3 people and larger. Vojkruco/Cooperative_Development_Guidelines#23 But its a work in progress now so of course I don't suggest to adopt it 😅 just that it can be done. > The other reason I went with committee-based for this proposal was that it's a bit easier to work with 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(6) structures in the US with a committee-based governance, especially when considering Open Collective and other groups for supporting 501(c)(6) structures. Ah I didn't know it was that bad ☹️ Sociocracy does have a so-called Mission Circle, but its hard to adopt for software projects since the practical aspect is missing. Hopefully Vojkruco can write it down and provide guidance at some point. > That said, whatever structure rereading Project adopts, I think some of those collaborative development principles like consent-focused development would be wonderful principles and policies to include! Thank you for the compliments 😊 Yeah even without the Circles I think the RFC Template and the governance or Code of Conduct or Decision Making have a lot of good things in there. Feel free to copy/adapt anything you want.

cgranade referenced this pull request from rereading/arcalibre

2025-12-23 23:27:49 +01:00

Change README to expand scope beyond archival goals. #18

This pull request can be merged automatically.

This branch is out-of-date with the base branch

You are not authorized to merge this pull request.

View command line instructions

Checkout

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.

git fetch -u origin cgranade/draft-charter:cgranade/draft-charter

git switch cgranade/draft-charter

Merge

Merge the changes and update on Forgejo.

Warning: The "Autodetect manual merge" setting is not enabled for this repository, you will have to mark this pull request as manually merged afterwards.

git switch main

git merge --no-ff cgranade/draft-charter

git switch cgranade/draft-charter

git rebase main

git switch main

git merge --ff-only cgranade/draft-charter

git switch cgranade/draft-charter

git rebase main

git switch main

git merge --no-ff cgranade/draft-charter

git switch main

git merge --squash cgranade/draft-charter

git switch main

git merge --ff-only cgranade/draft-charter

git switch main

git merge cgranade/draft-charter

git push origin main

Rows
Columns

Proposal for project charter #1

Checkout

Merge