Governance Model
How the aDNA standard evolves: stewardship, release cadence, backwards compatibility, and the process for proposing changes.
Stewardship
Founding Architect Model
The aDNA standard is currently governed under a Founding Architect stewardship model:
- Steward: The Founding Architect (FA) holds decision authority over standard changes
- Scope: All normative changes to
adna_standard.md, conformance level definitions, and governance file requirements - Authority transfer: The FA may delegate stewardship to a Standard Council (3+ members) as the community grows. This transition is a governance decision, not a standard version change
Community Input
- Anyone may propose standard changes via the process defined below
- The FA reviews all proposals and provides written rationale for acceptance or rejection
- Community feedback is gathered via GitHub Issues on the aDNA repository
Release Cadence
| Track | Cadence | Scope |
|---|---|---|
Standard (adna_standard.md version) | As needed, estimated quarterly | Normative specification changes — conformance levels, required files, naming rules |
Governance (CLAUDE.md version, CHANGELOG.md) | Continuous | Operational changes — protocols, templates, skills, tooling |
Version Numbering
Both tracks use Major.Minor versioning:
- Major (e.g., v2.x → v3.0): May introduce breaking changes. Requires migration guidance.
- Minor (e.g., v2.1 → v2.2): Additive only. MUST NOT invalidate conformant instances.
See adna_standard.md §15.4 for the normative backwards compatibility promise.
Backwards Compatibility Promise
This promise is normative (defined in adna_standard.md §15.4):
- Minor standard versions MUST NOT invalidate conformant instances. An instance passing Starter/Standard/Full conformance at v2.1 MUST still pass at v2.2.
- Major standard versions MAY introduce breaking changes. When they do:
- Migration guidance MUST be published before or alongside the release
- A migration tool or checklist SHOULD be provided
- The previous major version MUST remain documented for reference
- Governance version changes do not affect standard conformance. A CLAUDE.md update from v5.5 to v6.0 does not require instance changes.
Proposing Standard Changes
Lightweight RFC Process
- Open a GitHub Issue with the
standard-changelabel - Describe: What you want to change, why, and the impact on existing conformant instances
- Classification: Is this a minor (additive) or major (breaking) change?
- Discussion: Community and FA discuss in the issue
- Decision: FA accepts, modifies, or declines with written rationale
- Implementation: Accepted changes are incorporated into the next standard release
Change Classification
| Type | Examples | Standard Version Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Additive | New optional field, new conformance check, new appendix | Minor bump (v2.2 → v2.3) |
| Normative tightening | SHOULD → MUST for existing recommendation | Major bump (v2.x → v3.0) |
| Structural | New required governance file, directory rename | Major bump |
| Editorial | Typo fixes, clarifications that don’t change requirements | No version bump |
Pre-Release Checklist
Before releasing a new standard version:
- All normative changes reviewed by FA
- Backwards compatibility verified for minor versions
- Migration guidance prepared for major versions
-
governance_sync_check.shreports zero drift -
adna_validate.pypasses on the reference instance (adna repo) - Example projects still pass their expected conformance level
- CHANGELOG.md updated with release entry
- Version strings updated in
adna_standard.md,README.md
Future Governance Evolution
As the aDNA community grows, governance may evolve:
- Standard Council (3-5 members) — shared stewardship with majority vote
- Working Groups — domain-specific groups (e.g., Bio-aDNA, Enterprise-aDNA) that propose extensions
- Formal RFC process — structured proposal documents with review periods
These transitions are human-gated decisions, not automatic thresholds.