Community and governance for research software
SkillAI & modelsCovers building and governing a community around research software: CONTRIBUTING guides, codes of conduct, governance models and decision-making, contributor recognition policy, issue and discussion hygiene, and handing over or sharing maintainership. Use when a project wants external contributors, when the user asks for a CONTRIBUTING.md, code of conduct or governance document, when maintainer burnout or bus-factor risks come up, or when a project is moving from single-author to team or community ownership. The contributor funnel and good-first-issue curation live in rseng-contributor-onboarding; health measurement in rseng-community-metrics; support operations in rseng-user-support.
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the Community and governance for research software skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by fdiblen/rseng-agent-skills in skills/rseng-community-governance/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Most research software dies with its author's contract. A community - even a small one - is the strongest sustainability mechanism a project has (rseng-maintenance-sustainability covers the technical side; this skill covers the human side). Governance is not bureaucracy: it is writing down who decides what, so contributors can act without waiting and maintainers can step back without collapse.
The contribution surface
Make contributing possible before promoting it:
- CONTRIBUTING.md: how to set up a dev environment (rseng-reproducible-environments), run tests (rseng-testing), propose changes (rseng-version-control-review), and what kinds of contribution are welcome (docs, examples and issue triage count).
- Code of conduct: adopt the Contributor Covenant rather than writing one; name real enforcement contacts - an unenforceable CoC is worse than none.
- Issue templates and labels: a good-first-issue label with genuinely scoped starter tasks is the single best onboarding tool.
- Respond to first-time contributors fast and kindly; the first interaction decides whether there is a second.
- Name the communication channels: where questions go (discussions, a chat channel, a mailing list), stated in the README and CONTRIBUTING - an active, discoverable channel is itself a measured community-health indicator; one well-tended channel beats three dead ones.
- Define a response timeframe and say it out loud ("issues get a first response within a week"): a stated expectation both reassures contributors and is checkable - response-within-a- defined-timeframe is how community health gets assessed from the outside. Pick a promise the maintainers can keep.
Governance, sized to the project
Write down the smallest true answer to "who decides":
- Single maintainer: say so ("BDFL-style; decisions by @name") - honesty beats pretense of process.
- Small team: document maintainer roles, how consensus is reached, and what happens on disagreement.
- Community-scale: consider a lightweight governance doc covering roles, decision process, and how new maintainers are added - opensource.guide's leadership-and-governance section catalogs proven patterns.
Contribution and recognition policy: state how contributors are credited - AUTHORS/CONTRIBUTORS file, changelog mentions, and citation metadata for substantial contributions (rseng-citation-metadata). Credit is the currency research contributors are paid in; be generous and systematic.
Onboarding and the bus factor
- Capture maintainer knowledge in docs as it is used: release runbooks (rseng-publishing-releasing), triage guidelines, architecture notes (rseng-documentation). If only one person can do a task, that task needs a document.
- Rotate responsibilities when there are two or more maintainers; the second person on releases halves the bus-factor risk.
- Handover: when a maintainer leaves, announce it, transfer forge permissions and registry ownership explicitly, and record the change - abandoned-looking ownership blocks both contributors and security response (rseng-security).
The wider community toolkit
Measurement, support and onboarding each have their own skill: community health metrics (rseng-community-metrics), support operations and the answer-once pipeline (rseng-user-support), and the contributor funnel from first issue to regular (rseng-contributor-onboarding) - this skill owns the rules and structures they operate within.
Sustaining participation
- Roadmap visibly (even a pinned issue): contributors invest where direction is clear (rseng-management-planning).
- Thank and release often: shipped contributions retain contributors; ones stuck in review for months lose them.
- Watch for burnout signals in maintainers - unanswered issues and guilt-driven replies - and respond by narrowing scope honestly (declaring feature-freeze or maintenance-mode is legitimate governance).
Working with this skill
This skill is source-independent: its authority is the community guidance linked below.
Learn more (verified):
- https://opensource.guide - GitHub's open source guides (building community, leadership and governance)
- https://www.contributor-covenant.org - the Contributor Covenant
- https://www.software.ac.uk/guide/starting-community-taking-your-software-world - SSI guide on starting a community
Related skills
Check whether any of these applies before moving on:
- rseng-citation-metadata - systematic contributor credit
- rseng-community-metrics - measures the stated promises
- rseng-contributor-onboarding - funnel and first-issue curation
- rseng-maintenance-sustainability - technical side of sustainability
- rseng-security - ownership handover unblocks security response
- rseng-user-support - support channel operations
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 20
- Forks
- 2
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
rseng-community-governance- Source
- github.com/fdiblen/rseng-agent-skills