Rules for TYPO3 Units 

1 Definition 

Units are self-managed groups of TYPO3 contributors working together to deliver value to the TYPO3 Product within a specific responsibility domain. Under the leadership of a Unit Coordinator and governed by the TYPO3 Association, the Units aim to be consensus-driven implementers of the TYPO3 Product Roadmap and TYPO3 Product Strategy (that is itself created through input from the Units in the Unit Cooperation Panel) and the TYPO3 Association Strategy.

2 Constitution and Charter 

3 Structure 

4 Transparency and Reporting 

Frequently Asked Questions 

1. What role is the Coordinator really?

It may be good to think of the Coordinator as a project manager, like what you find in a web agency. A leader with organizing and delegating as their main task.

2. It looks like a Coordinator carries a lot of responsibility and a lot of tasks. How is this realistically achievable?

It is important to note that one of the Coordinator’s main responsibilities is to delegate tasks away from themselves. The workload will differ from unit to unit, but some kind of compensation will be necessary, either as time donated individually, from an employer, or as a budget decision by the TYPO3 Association Board.

3. It may be a question of definition exactly what lies within the responsibility of a unit. Who makes decisions in these cases, for example what is defined as a feature or that code should be backported?

It is the Unit Cooperation Panel’s job to coordinate between the units and resolve matters of jurisdiction or conflicts of interest between Units.

4. I don’t want someone to decide what I should do. Do I have a place in a Unit?

Yes, you can always be a Unit Supporter. This role comes with full freedom to choose the tasks you want to take on. For Unit Members, the level of commitment is greater and, when necessary, you are expected to accept tasks you do not like, but that are necessary for the greater good of the project.

5. What happens if nobody wants to take on the Unit Coordinator or Deputy Unit Coordinator role?

If a unit is without a coordinator because nobody wants to take on the leadership, this would be a very serious problem. It is the project’s problem and no longer something unit-internal. It will have to be escalated to the TYPO3 Association Board and will probably require re-chartering or re-establishing the Unit. The Governance Working Group has requested that the TYPO3 Association Board defines an escalation process for this.

6. What does it mean that the Unit Coordinator is answerable to the TYPO3 Association Board?

Though the Unit Coordinator is elected by the Unit Council, their responsibility is to the TYPO3 Project, represented by the TYPO3 Association. Responsibility for the Association’s day-to-day operations is delegated to the TYPO3 Association Board by the General Assembly. If the Unit Coordinator fails to meet the needs and requirements of the Project, the TYPO3 Association Board may ultimately remove the Unit Coordinator from the role, and the Unit Council will have to elect a new Unit Coordinator. The Governance Working Group has requested that the TYPO3 Association Board defines an escalation process for this.

7. Does a Unit Coordinator or other person in a Unit role have to be employed by the TYPO3 Association or TYPO3 Company?

No. There is no rule either way and they may be employed by anyone or no one, depending on what is the best solution for the individual and the project.

8. What are good examples of a suitable platform for publication of decisions, structures, delegated authority, roles, and role assignments?

For example, tasks may be made available in a project management system, decisions in a Git repository, and structures and roles on a web page.

9. Does the Deputy Coordinator as acting Unit Coordinator also answer to the TYPO3 Association Board?

Yes, since the acting Unit Coordinator takes over all tasks and responsibilities of the Unit Coordinator, they are answerable to the TYPO3 Association Board in the same way as any Unit Coordinator.

10. That the membership role automatically expires feels very absolute. What about people taking a sabbatical, for example?

The Unit Coordinator can make exceptions, but it’s good to have a general rule with that possibility. The responsibility for monitoring expiry is currently with the Member first, which is a way to give people clear responsibilities and not overload the Coordinator.

11. What if a task is too hard for someone to complete or problems show up during the work on a task?

It is the responsibility of a task delegate to report about task status and any factor that may affect their ability to complete a task. Once such an issue has been reported, the person responsible for delegating the task must try to solve the problem by providing help, tasking others with providing the help, or delegating the task to others.

12. What are good rules and objective acceptance criteria?

This is an important topic, but it is beyond the scope of these Rules to define philosophy. This is a topic for the Unit Cooperation Panel. It should be a constant point of improvement and a living discussion within the community at large.

13. What happens if multiple units need to have the same contribution rules and acceptance criteria?

The Units already have a requirement to make their rules and criteria compatible with other units to the largest possible extent and the Unit Cooperation Panel is responsible for coordinating and harmonizing rules. In addition, two or more units may have a requirement to keep exactly the same rules and criteria laid down in their respective Unit Charters.

14. Why doesn’t these rules define who is allowed to merge code?

As not all units deal with code and use “merge” as the verb, these rules use “acceptance” as a more generally applicable word. The Unit Coordinator is required to publish rules and objective acceptance criteria for contributions. Ultimately, the acceptance (for code, the merge decision) is up to the Unit Coordinator, but this person can also delegate such tasks.

15. Why do these rules not address occasional contributions that are made without a task assignment?

This kind of ad hoc, informal contribution is warmly welcome, but it comes from outside of the unit, so the rules don’t require them to comply with any organizational requirements. However, the way the Unit handles the contribution once it is submitted is covered by these rules.

16. Could the Unit Charter define specific working groups within a Unit including its scope, authority, representation?

Yes. The charter isn’t limited in scope. A Security Working Group might need chartered exceptions from transparency and contribution rules. However, since the Units are self-managed, a top-down approach to defining the unit’s operational realm would be unfortunate. Instead, the Charter could mention specific topics within the unit’s responsibility domain, possibly with modifiers like “emphasizing” or “ensuring.” Then, it’s up to the unit to define its organization.

17. What is a petition?

A petition is an instrument mentioned in the TYPO3 Association bylaws. The word means a formal written request or complaint requesting a particular action, commonly a change in policy or the correction of a wrong. For Units, petitions also provide a single point of contact through which requests can be made.

18. What are examples of TYPO3 Association bodies that can petition Units?

Committees and units, but also the General Assembly, Board, or Business Control Committee, can formally petition a Unit. Even bodies that have decision-making power over Units may choose to petition them instead. In that case, the wish is clear, but the final decision is left up to the decision-making processes of the Unit.

19. What happens if the Coordinator and Members do not allow new supporters to become a Member?

Though hopefully avoidable through unit size, it is a potential risk that the Unit decides to become closed to new members. Such a unit would be dysfunctional, requiring the TYPO3 Association Board to take action. If someone doesn’t feel welcomed into a unit, they should contact the Ombudspersons or the TYPO3 Association Board. The Governance Working Group has requested that the TYPO3 Association Board defines an escalation process for dysfunctional Units.

20. How do we handle cross-concern initiatives, like today’s Stats Initiative?

This could be an initiative under the Feature Unit, but people from multiple units can participate in it. However, it would have to be founded in one Unit, with a coordinator from that unit.

21. How can cross-cutting requirements, like accessibility, be applied in all Units, not just Stability & Compliance, where the accessibility topic belongs?

Accessibility is a compliance topic, but the Stability & Compliance and Feature units will have to work closely on this on a bilateral level. Certain types of required cooperation should go into their charters too. The Unit Cooperation Panel can also be involved, but under a more general inclusivity umbrella that includes the non-technical units too.

22. Can the Unit Rules and the Panel Rules explicitly state that the Conflict of Interest Management Policy applies?

In keeping with the wish for separation of concerns, it should be the Conflict of Interest Management Policy that defines its scope. The Governance Working Group has asked that the TYPO3 Association Board adapts the Conflict of Interest Management Policy to explicitly apply to roles in the Unit Rules and Panel Rules.

23. Why is the Unit Coordinator’s term one year with no term limit when regular renewal could bring new ideas, skills, and perspectives and avoid concentration of power?

It is important to bring in new people and skills, but it shouldn’t be controlled with the Coordinator’s term limit. Unit Health and Charter Compliance have been made explicit responsibilities for the Coordinator. The task of the Coordinator is administrative and the position itself should not be tied to long-term policy and strategy. These should be created and maintained by the Unit Council. This makes a Coordinator replacement an administrative rather than a directional change. 3.1.5.a now explicitly mentions that the Council's responsibility for long-term policy and strategy within the Unit.

24. Can the General Assembly Be Asked to Decide on Term Limits and Periodic Re-Confirmation for Unit Coordinators?

The General Assembly is responsible for the general direction of the Units. If necessary, the Unit rules can be changed by the TYPO3 Association Board later, but only the general idea should be implemented in the bylaws at the General Assembly. Unit Coordinators are periodically reconfirmed during the Unit Council’s annual Unit Coordinator election.

25. Which decision-making best practices apply to a Unit?

The Governance Working Group has asked that the TYPO3 Association Board implements a project-wide decision-making best practice.

26. Must Unit Members accept all assigned tasks?

According to section 3.1.3.b Unit Members can ask to have tasks assigned or tasks can be assigned to them by others. It awards "a large degree of freedom in task selection," but it also says that "tasks should be accepted and accepted tasks must be fulfilled to the best of their ability."

27. What is the difference between a "must" and "should"?

This difference is important. RFC 2119 defines "must" as "an absolute requirement." A "should" is a strong expectation and normally optional. We can understand it as a conditional "must" where "there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore […], but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course." The Governance Working Group asks that the Business Control Committee (BCC) is tasked with auditing decisions that diverge from a "should."

28. Can Unit Member have a different name? It is easy to mix up with Association Members and it makes it sound like Unit Supporters are not part of the Unit.

Unit Members and Unit Supporters are both parts of their Units, but with different accountability and commitment requirements. The Governance Working Group has discussed renaming the Unit Member, but none of the suggested alternatives are easily self-explanatory or may carry other unfortunate meanings. (For example: Unit Owner, Unit Proprietor, Unit Stakeholer, Unit Fellow, Unit Selectman, Unit Guardian, and Unit Warden.)

29. Which TYPO3 Association bodies can report violations that lead to the removal of a Unit Member or `Unit Supporter from a Unit?

The Governance Working Group has requested that the TYPO3 Association Board clarifies the responsible body for handling violations, ideally deferring decisions in cases of such violations to the Business Control Committee (BCC) through a change in the bylaws.

30. What is the reason for the expectation that Unit Members take on assigned tasks?

Unless in exceptional cases, Unit Members are expected to take on assigned tasks. The Unit is responsible for fulfilling tasks to ensure that the goals of the TYPO3 Project (represented by the Unit Cooperation Panel as the Product Owner) are met. It is also necessary to avoid cases where promises of certain goals being reached are made based on a certain commitment, but where it turns out that nobody wants to take on the task in the end. This has previously put an intolerable load on conscientious team leads, who have had to complete tasks on their own.

31. What happens if the Coordinator shapes tasks in a way that makes them undesirable to take on or impossible to solve?

This would be an example of not maintaining good Unit health and that the Coordinator is not doing their job. This way it could be a reason to remove the Coordinator. This can be done both by the TYPO3 Association Board and the Unit Council and should prevent the Coordinator from making such decisions.

32. What happens to member expiry if a unit runs out of tasks or if no :ref:`Unit Member <unit-rules-member>` accepts tasks?

This is theoretical. In this case the Board would have to disband the Unit, optionally chartering a new Unit with new Unit Members.

33. Must all task assignment and approval be done by the Unit Coordinator?

No. Though these tasks ultimately lie with the Unit Coordinator, their own primary task is to delegate such responsibilities away from themselves.

34. How can the Unit increase contribution and participation when it defines so many rules and so much hierarchy?

The hierarchy is there to organize responsibility and accountability and the rules are there to define the governance of that organization. The goal of the higher levels of the hierarchy is to serve the levels below. For example, the Unit Members’ main task is to enable contribution. This focus is meant to counteract the vicious circle where the most experienced contributors are so busy with their own contribution that they don’t have time to help those less experienced and onboard new contributors.

35. What is the relationship between compensation and a role’s decision-making power and accountability?

Compensation is not connected with decision-making power. Instead decision-making power relates to a person's accountability for their actions. The more responsibility you have, the more you have to commit yourself to the common goals of the project, and the more accountable you become. The Governance Working Group has asked that the TYPO3 Association Board clarifies the relationship between compensation/employment and the requirement to complete tasks.

36. Why don’t these Rules specify terms for joining, like confidentiality and trademark obligations?

We consider the bylaws to be the Association’s membership terms. Signing a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) will not be necessary in all cases. It must be left up to the Units to decide when and if they need it.

37. Why do Supporters fall outside every contractual obligation?

This is the point of Supporters. They shouldn’t be obliged to do anything. Additional requirements must be left up to the units to decide if and when they need it.

38. Isn’t the task of being a Unit Coordinator way too much for a volunteer?

A focus on delegation of tasks notwithstanding, a Unit Coordinator’s work is important and should happen within normal work hours.

39. Why not limit the number of Unit roles filled by employees of the same company?

The Units, and contribution in general, is not a situation where it is important to limit the influence of single companies. Open source contribution is often described as a meritocracy, where those who do most and carry the largest burden are the ones afforded the most influence. Limiting the participation from a single company could therefore limit the ability of the TYPO3 project to benefit from major institutional contributors.

40. Why not make it absolutely forbidden for people from the TYPO3 Company to take on formal roles in a Units?

The TYPO3 Company (TYPO3 GmbH) was founded by the TYPO3 Association as a way to generate income from creating, supporting, and promoting services that improve the entire TYPO3 Project ecosystem. Some of that income is being used to pay the wages of TYPO3 Core developers that started out as regular contributors taking on responsibilities for the project. It would be a disservice to the project to limit experienced contributors from taking part in formal roles.

41. Are TYPO3 Association membership costs a financial barrier to Unit Membership?

At the time of writing, the TYPO3 Association Community membership costs €10 annually. When signing up, there is an additional sign-up fee of €10, making the first year €20, and subsequent years €10. This should be affordable for most contributors. Though mostly symbolic at this level, all membership fees are a show of commitment to the project and helps contribute to funding, maintaining, and coordinating the development of the TYPO3 CMS software. In addition to the governance benefits of Association members managing the Association's money, paying for a membership also demonstrates commitment and accountability. That is an important faculty in those choosing to become Unit Members.

42. If administrative, why do Coordinator and Deputy roles need to be elected at all?

Even when administrative, some roles need to be founded on trust. Elections are a good way of documenting that the trust exists.

43. Why compensate formal roles with money, when better tooling could reduce administrative overhead instead?

Compensation is not a requirement, but an enabler when the requirements become difficult to handle without it. Tools like issue trackers are used by every part of the TYPO3 community to reduce administrative overhead, but they do still require management. The issue queue for the TYPO3 Core is very large, and the work of managing it does not only include assigning tasks. Few issues arrive ready to be implemented. Many require triaging or conceptualizing. Others need to be developed into solution proposals. The quality of the issue queue will ultimately reflect on our ability to close those issues.

44. Doesn't a formal, rigid structure work against the flexibility we need to navigate a changing tech landscape?

Indeed, and that is why the Units have been proposed. The preceding team structure could not handle rapid change: each team required months to demonstrate its right to exist and could only receive budgets once a year. Units, organized around broader groups of subject-matter experts, enable rapid changes to be implemented across a larger topical area without requiring the involvement of other bodies.