This governance framework establishes the organizational structure, decision-making processes, and accountability mechanisms for Fused Gaming. Our goal is to maintain transparency, foster community participation, and ensure sustainable growth while staying true to our mission of creating exceptional gaming experiences.
Our governance is guided by these principles:
- Transparency: Open communication and publicly documented decisions
- Community-Driven: Active participation from our gaming community
- Innovation: Embracing new ideas and technologies
- Inclusivity: Welcoming diverse perspectives and contributors
- Quality: Maintaining high standards across all projects
- Accountability: Clear ownership and responsibility for initiatives
The Core Team consists of trusted contributors with elevated privileges and responsibilities:
- Maintainers: Oversee individual projects and repositories
- Technical Leads: Guide technical architecture and best practices
- Community Managers: Foster community engagement and support
- Security Team: Manage security policies and incident response
Open to all community members:
- Contributors: Anyone who submits code, documentation, or ideas
- Reviewers: Community members who review pull requests
- Ambassadors: Active community members who help onboard newcomers
| Role | Repository Access | Decision Authority | Responsibilities |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maintainer | Admin | High | Final approval on PRs, releases, roadmap |
| Technical Lead | Write | Medium | Architecture decisions, code reviews |
| Community Manager | Write | Medium | Community initiatives, event planning |
| Security Team | Write | High (security matters) | Security reviews, incident response |
| Contributor | Read | Proposal | Submit PRs, participate in discussions |
Examples: Bug fixes, documentation updates, minor improvements
Process:
- Submit PR with clear description
- Pass automated checks
- Get approval from one maintainer or technical lead
- Merge after 24-hour review window
Examples: New features, dependency changes, refactoring
Process:
- Create GitHub issue or discussion
- Present proposal with rationale and alternatives
- Allow 3-7 days for feedback
- Requires approval from 2+ core team members
- Document decision in issue/PR
Examples: New projects, major architecture changes, governance updates
Process:
- Create RFC (Request for Comments) issue
- Announce in community channels
- Allow 14+ days for community feedback
- Host discussion session if needed
- Requires approval from 3+ core team members
- Document decision publicly
When disagreements arise:
- Discussion: Engage in good-faith discussion on the issue/PR
- Mediation: If no consensus, invite neutral core team member to mediate
- Vote: If still unresolved, core team votes (simple majority)
- Appeal: Decisions can be appealed within 30 days with new information
- Submit proposal via GitHub issue using "Project Proposal" template
- Include problem statement, proposed solution, resources needed
- Community discussion period (14 days minimum)
- Core team reviews feasibility and alignment with goals
- Decision communicated publicly with rationale
- Approved projects added to roadmap
- Regular progress updates (at least monthly)
- Follow contribution guidelines
- Maintain documentation
- Bug fixes and security patches
- Community support
- May transition to "seeking maintainer" status
- Projects no longer actively maintained
- Clearly marked in README
- Security policy no longer applies
- Review project README and contributing guidelines
- Check existing issues and discussions
- Join our community channels (Discord, Telegram)
- Start with "good first issue" labels
- Follow code style and conventions
- Include tests where applicable
- Update documentation
- Sign commits (GPG recommended)
- Link related issues
- All changes require code review
- Reviews should be timely (within 3-5 days)
- Constructive feedback expected
- Address comments or explain disagreement
We maintain public records of:
- Meeting notes (when applicable)
- Decision rationales
- Project roadmaps
- Security advisories
- Governance changes
- Monthly: Project status updates via GitHub Discussions
- Quarterly: Community metrics and goal progress
- Annually: Year in review and strategic planning
For Core Team:
- Respond to issues/PRs within reasonable timeframes
- Participate in governance discussions
- Maintain assigned projects
- Uphold code of conduct
For Community Contributors:
- Follow contribution guidelines
- Respect community standards
- Communicate clearly and professionally
- Inactive core team members may be moved to emeritus status (3+ months inactive)
- Code of conduct violations may result in removal
- Voluntary stepping down is always respected
We track organizational health through:
- Active contributors (monthly)
- Community engagement (discussions, issues, PRs)
- New member onboarding
- Discord/community activity
- Project completion rate
- Time to merge PRs
- Issue resolution time
- Security response time
- Code coverage
- Security audit results
- User satisfaction
- Documentation completeness
Review Cadence: Quarterly review by core team
This governance framework is a living document:
- Minor Updates: Clarifications and corrections can be made by any core team member via PR
- Major Changes: Require RFC process with 21-day community feedback period and approval from 75% of core team
- Annual Review: Complete governance review conducted each January
- Open issue with "Governance Proposal" label
- Explain problem and proposed solution
- Community feedback period
- Core team decision
- Update document and announce
Our strategic planning aligns with this governance structure:
- Annual Goals: Set each January via community input and core team planning
- Quarterly OKRs: Objectives and Key Results reviewed quarterly
- Project Milestones: Tracked in GitHub Projects
- Goals tracked in GOALS.md
- Updated monthly
- Reviewed quarterly
- Progress reported to community
See GOALS.md for current organizational objectives.
We use GitHub Projects to track:
- Strategic initiatives
- Feature development
- Bug tracking
- Community proposals
- Backlog: Proposed items awaiting triage
- Planned: Approved and scheduled
- In Progress: Currently being worked on
- Review: Awaiting review/testing
- Done: Completed items
Standard labels across repositories:
priority: critical/high/medium/lowtype: bug/feature/enhancement/documentationstatus: needs-triage/blocked/in-reviewgood first issue- For newcomers
- GitHub Discussions: Strategic discussions, announcements
- GitHub Issues: Project-specific discussions
- Telegram: @fusedgg - Community chat
- Twitter: @fuseddotgg - Updates
- LinkedIn: Company Page - Professional updates
- Use appropriate channels for topics
- Keep discussions respectful and on-topic
- Search before posting duplicate questions
- Provide context and details
- All projects clearly licensed (see LICENSE files)
- Respect third-party licenses
- Contributors retain copyright, grant organization license
- Respect user privacy
- Follow GDPR and applicable regulations
- Minimize data collection
- Transparent about data usage
- Expected from all participants
- Enforce consistently and fairly
- Zero tolerance for harassment
- Report violations to core team
- v1.0: January 2026 - Initial governance framework
- SECURITY.md - Security policy and reporting
- GOALS.md - Current organizational goals
- README.md - Organization overview
- Individual repository CONTRIBUTING.md files
- RFC: Request for Comments
- PR: Pull Request
- OKR: Objectives and Key Results
- Core Team: Trusted contributors with elevated privileges
- Emeritus: Honored former core team members
Last Updated: January 2026 Next Review: January 2027 Version: 1.0
For questions about this governance framework, open a GitHub Discussion or contact the core team via our community channels.