Do we require a committee to provide specific oversight for projects engaged in Functional Safety Critical Software Development?
Do we need a committee to provide specific oversight for projects engaged in functional safety critical software development?
Here are some initial thoughts on the purpose of such a committee:
In open-source functional safety critical software development, the oversight committee governs safety processes, ensuring clear contribution guidelines and managing diverse contributors. They ensure that projects have established robust review mechanisms for community contributions, make transparent safety-critical decisions, and provide guidance on functional safety to the open source team. Their role is to balance open collaboration with stringent safety demands through clear processes, transparent decision-making, and fostering a shared understanding of safety within the community to ultimately deliver a safe product.
Some additional thoughts are captured here.
We can use this issue to refine those initial thoughts into a mandate/purpose for the committee?
Assuming that we believe that such a committee is valuable/required...
Where does the committee fit in our governance structure? Is the committee attached to a specific working group (i.e., we might have more than one committee), or do we have a single commmittee with responsibility across all working groups? I presume that activities of the committee (e.g., audits) would need to be funded by a working group, so that may necessitate a tight coupling.
What is the composition of the committee? How does one become a member?
What are the responsibilities of the committee?
What authority does the committee have?