Kubeflow is a new project that is getting a lot of interest from different companies, and they want some assertions that, if they invest into the project, they will have a way to be recognized and participate on the discussions regarding the direction of the project.
Kubernetes is a more mature project, that has moved to be a project at the Linux Foundation, which is a more neutral place where corporations are used to collaborate and understand the governance model. Having said that, the governance document is similar to Kubeflow, which makes sense based on the origin of these two projects.
In these two examples, the governance aspect has probably been influenced by the amount of enterprise interest that these projects have attracted.
In the Jupyter community case, we have to consider the main contributor groups (Academia and Enterprise) and start by identifying if there are any issues that needs to be addressed. And then learn from some of these examples and see how this could be applied to the Jupyter community.
Are there any known issues around Jupyter community governance?