P1: Define organization governance review cadence, escalation, and succession

[BunsDev]

Outcome

Establish the human operating cadence that keeps the governance plane current without turning it into a central planning bottleneck.

Cadence

• weekly: drift, expired review dates/exceptions, failed required checks, stale generated views, and blocked P0 initiatives;
• monthly: repository lifecycle/disposition, dependency evidence freshness, owner/DRI coverage, workflow pin freshness, and public/private leakage checks;
• quarterly: canonical ownership map, architecture conflicts, admin-control effectiveness, break-glass exercise status, portfolio consolidation, and whether file-based governance still scales;
• event-driven: new repository/public graduation, R4 contract change, security incident, maintainer departure, package/release channel change, org setting change, or proposed new control plane/database/service.

Responsibility model

• one decision owner for each cross-repository initiative;
• one technical DRI per repository/workstream;
• canonical-domain owners decide component scope;
• security review for R3/R4 boundary changes;
• organization administrators apply GitHub settings through the separately authorized path;
• backup reviewers and successor records added before mature-governance claims;
• conflicts escalate by stopping irreversible/protected work, collecting exact evidence, resolving ownership, and adding a regression check.

Acceptance criteria

• Review calendar and issue templates are documented.
• Every active public repository has an owner, DRI, review date, and succession status.
• Bootstrap-single-owner records remain explicit until genuine separation exists.
• P0 escalation path and response expectations are documented without implying asynchronous guarantees.
• Temporary incident policy has an owner, issue, expiry, and removal verification.
• Ownership transitions preserve outgoing/incoming identity, effective date, unresolved risk, and handoff evidence.
• Quarterly review can recommend continue, modify, federate, or replace the control plane using measured evidence.
• No Project field, meeting outcome, or central-team assertion can override canonical implementation or protected authority.

The cadence should optimize clarity and drift prevention, not create status meetings or duplicated task updates.