Skip to content

# Governance

This page outlines the governance model for the Unified Intent Mediator (UIM) Protocol project. It explains how decisions are made, how the project is structured, and how community members can participate in the governance process.

## Governance Model

The UIM Protocol follows a community-driven governance model with a steering committee providing oversight and direction. This model is designed to balance the need for clear leadership with the benefits of community participation and transparency.

## Steering Committee

The Steering Committee is responsible for the overall direction and health of the UIM Protocol project. It consists of representatives from various stakeholder groups, including AI agent developers, web service providers, and the open-source community.

### Responsibilities

The Steering Committee is responsible for:

1. Strategic Direction: Setting the long-term vision and roadmap for the UIM Protocol.
2. Technical Oversight: Ensuring technical excellence and coherence in the protocol design and implementation.
3. Community Management: Fostering a healthy and inclusive community.
4. Resource Allocation: Allocating resources to different aspects of the project.
5. Conflict Resolution: Resolving conflicts that cannot be resolved through normal community processes.
6. Brand and Marketing: Overseeing the project's brand and marketing efforts.

### Composition

The Steering Committee consists of 7 members:

- 2 representatives from AI agent developers
- 2 representatives from web service providers
- 2 representatives from the open-source community
- 1 chairperson

### Selection Process

Steering Committee members are selected through a combination of appointment and election:

1. Initial Committee: The initial committee was appointed by the project founders.
2. Subsequent Members: Subsequent members are elected by the community through a transparent voting process.
3. Term Length: Committee members serve for a term of 2 years, with staggered terms to ensure continuity.
4. Term Limits: Committee members can serve a maximum of 2 consecutive terms.

### Decision Making

The Steering Committee makes decisions through a consensus-seeking process:

1. Proposals: Any committee member can make a proposal.
2. Discussion: The proposal is discussed by the committee.
3. Consensus Seeking: The committee seeks consensus on the proposal.
4. Voting: If consensus cannot be reached, a vote is taken, with a simple majority required for approval.
5. Transparency: All decisions and their rationales are documented and shared with the community.

## Technical Committee

The Technical Committee is responsible for the technical aspects of the UIM Protocol, including the specification, reference implementations, and technical documentation.

### Responsibilities

The Technical Committee is responsible for:

1. Specification Development: Developing and maintaining the UIM Protocol specification.
2. Reference Implementations: Overseeing the development of reference implementations.
3. Technical Documentation: Ensuring comprehensive and accurate technical documentation.
4. Technical Decisions: Making technical decisions about the protocol design and implementation.
5. Technical Roadmap: Developing and maintaining the technical roadmap.

### Composition

The Technical Committee consists of 5 members:

- 3 core developers with significant contributions to the UIM Protocol
- 2 technical experts from the community

### Selection Process

Technical Committee members are selected based on their technical expertise and contributions to the project:

1. Initial Committee: The initial committee was appointed by the Steering Committee.
2. Subsequent Members: Subsequent members are nominated by the community and appointed by the Steering Committee.
3. Term Length: Committee members serve for a term of 1 year, with the possibility of renewal.

### Decision Making

The Technical Committee makes decisions through a technical consensus process:

1. Proposals: Technical proposals are submitted as GitHub issues or pull requests.
2. Discussion: The proposal is discussed by the committee and the community.
3. Technical Consensus: The committee seeks technical consensus on the proposal.
4. Implementation: Once consensus is reached, the proposal is implemented.

## Working Groups

Working Groups are formed to address specific aspects of the UIM Protocol project. They are temporary or permanent groups focused on particular areas of work.

### Current Working Groups

1. Specification Working Group: Focused on developing and maintaining the UIM Protocol specification.
2. Implementation Working Group: Focused on developing reference implementations and SDKs.
3. Documentation Working Group: Focused on creating and maintaining documentation.
4. Community Working Group: Focused on community building and engagement.
5. Security Working Group: Focused on security aspects of the protocol.

### Formation and Dissolution

Working Groups are formed and dissolved by the Steering Committee based on the project's needs:

1. Formation: A Working Group is formed when there is a need for focused work on a specific aspect of the project.
2. Charter: Each Working Group has a charter that defines its scope, goals, and timeline.
3. Dissolution: A Working Group is dissolved when its goals have been achieved or when it is no longer needed.

### Participation

Participation in Working Groups is open to all community members:

1. Joining: Community members can join a Working Group by expressing interest and demonstrating relevant expertise or willingness to contribute.
2. Leadership: Each Working Group has a lead appointed by the Steering Committee.
3. Reporting: Working Groups report regularly to the Steering Committee on their progress.

## Community Participation

The UIM Protocol is a community-driven project, and community participation is essential to its success. There are several ways for community members to participate in the governance process:

### Contribution Paths

1. Code Contributions: Contributing code to the UIM Protocol repositories.
2. Documentation: Improving the documentation.
3. Issue Reporting: Reporting bugs and suggesting features.
4. Discussion Participation: Participating in discussions on GitHub, Discord, and other platforms.
5. Working Group Participation: Joining Working Groups to contribute to specific aspects of the project.
6. Community Events: Participating in community events such as meetups and conferences.

### Recognition and Advancement

The UIM Protocol project recognizes and rewards community contributions:

1. Contributors: Anyone who contributes to the project in any way.
2. Committers: Contributors who have made significant contributions and have been granted commit access.
3. Maintainers: Committers who have demonstrated leadership and are responsible for maintaining specific parts of the project.
4. Committee Members: Maintainers who have been elected or appointed to the Steering or Technical Committees.

### Code of Conduct

All community members are expected to adhere to the Code of Conduct. The Code of Conduct outlines the expected behavior and the consequences of violating it.

## Decision Making Process

The UIM Protocol project follows a transparent and inclusive decision-making process:

### Types of Decisions

1. Strategic Decisions: Made by the Steering Committee.
2. Technical Decisions: Made by the Technical Committee.
3. Working Group Decisions: Made by the respective Working Groups.
4. Day-to-Day Decisions: Made by maintainers and committers.

### Process

1. Proposal: A proposal is made through the appropriate channel (GitHub issue, pull request, discussion, etc.).
2. Discussion: The proposal is discussed by the community and the relevant committee or group.
3. Refinement: The proposal is refined based on feedback.
4. Decision: A decision is made through the appropriate process (consensus, voting, etc.).
5. Implementation: The decision is implemented.
6. Review: The implementation is reviewed and adjusted as needed.

### Transparency

All decisions and their rationales are documented and shared with the community:

1. GitHub: Technical decisions are documented in GitHub issues and pull requests.
2. Meeting Notes: Committee meetings are documented with notes shared with the community.
3. Announcements: Major decisions are announced through the project's communication channels.
4. Documentation: Decisions that affect the protocol specification or implementation are documented in the appropriate documentation.

## Conflict Resolution

Conflicts are inevitable in any community. The UIM Protocol project has a clear process for resolving conflicts:

1. Direct Communication: Parties involved in a conflict are encouraged to communicate directly to resolve the issue.
2. Mediation: If direct communication fails, a neutral third party can be brought in to mediate.
3. Committee Intervention: If mediation fails, the relevant committee (Steering or Technical) can intervene to resolve the conflict.
4. Final Decision: In rare cases where all other methods fail, the Steering Committee can make a final decision.

## Changes to Governance

The governance model itself can evolve over time to better serve the project and community:

1. Proposal: Changes to the governance model can be proposed by any community member.
2. Discussion: The proposal is discussed by the community and the Steering Committee.
3. Decision: The Steering Committee makes a decision on the proposal.
4. Implementation: If approved, the changes are implemented and documented.

## Conclusion

The UIM Protocol's governance model is designed to be transparent, inclusive, and effective. It balances the need for clear leadership with the benefits of community participation. By following this model, we aim to create a healthy and sustainable project that serves the needs of all stakeholders.

For questions about governance or how to get involved, please reach out to the Steering Committee or join the community discussions on GitHub or Discord.