create Division ID Governance OCDEP

[djbridges]

A proposed governance model for OCD division IDs, as discussed in the Ballot Data Working Group

[kep]

These are valuable initial structures for building out a robust division-ID governance process. Thank you, Donny!

[afomi]

@djbridges - being explicit about the processes surrounding this data project is quite valuable. Thanks!

I'm not familiar with the .rst format, but think this is a useful draft. I'm curious about the implementation of the process. Given this process is encoded in this repo, I'm wondering how accountability will be assessed and enforced.

[fgregg]

HI @afomi. Could you expand a little bit on what you mean by "I'm wondering how accountability will be assessed and enforced." What are you thinking about?

[afomi]

I'm thinking that having a codified process is valuable in and of itself. But, the execution of that process happens in people systems, instead of technical systems (ie: a compiler and runtime). So, I was just thinking about the implications of having this process codified inside the repo. Is it the best place for it? Would the wiki be better suited during draft time?

Overall, code in the repo represents a source of truth. And while I really like the idea of codifying the people processes (the governance), it just strikes me as a separate, but related concern --- making me question its implications of being in code, in the repository.

With that said, its a loosely held opinion of mine. I'm curious overall how governance of open projects is implemented and how it evolves.

[fgregg]

Hi @afomi, the first OCDEP describes the OCDEP process and is a great place to start: http://docs.opencivicdata.org/en/latest/proposals/0001.html But, briefly, the OCDEP process has been working pretty well for the Open Civic Data community so far.

For a bit more context, the OCDEP process is heavily influence by the way that the Python community handles big changes: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001/. This in turn is part of a tradition of self-governance on the internet that include the RFC Process (which worked out the way that world web word work).

Hope that helps!

[afomi]

The extra context is extra helpful. Thanks @fgregg!

[jpmckinney]

FYI, some comments are appearing as "Show outdated" but only because typos were corrected - there are still substantive comments within those sections, so please expand those while reviewing.

[jamesturk]

Added some inline comments, agree w/ the need for geographic scope. Also, where is the list of participants going to be published? I'd be fine w/ using this doc, once accepted as the canonical source, or perhaps it'd be better to have this entered as two OCDEPs, one that is the this document and a second that is the current membership/governance & will be updated more frequently.

[todrobbins]

This may be an uninformed question, but how would I become involved/join the Ballot Data Working Group?

Cheers!

[djbridges]

@todrobbins - I'll connect with you to give you some more info when we're getting back together.

@jpmckinney @jamesturk @fgregg - Would love to get your feedback on how this iteration handles some of your earlier concerns! Thanks!

[jpmckinney]

Also, I think @ccongchen's questions are good, but may not need to be answered in the OCDEP itself.

[jamesturk]

I'm in favor, I assume some aspects of this will be tweaked but think this gives us a good foundation to build upon.