# Governance and Revision

## Revision process

Whenever standards are revised there needs to be a governance process.

This is likely to make use of an [issue tracker](../patterns/documentation.md#issue-tracker) and a [changelog](../patterns/documentation.md#version-control-and-changelogs-for-the-schema-and-documentation).

```{seealso}
[Versioning patterns](../patterns/versioning)
```

### Worked example: OCDS

The governance process for the Open Contracting Data Standard is set out in the diagram below.

![Governance process](https://standard.open-contracting.org/latest/en/_images/upgrade_process.png)

As the OCDS [ChangeLog illustrates](http://standard.open-contracting.org/latest/en/schema/changelog/), each change has a related GitHub issue where changes are discussed.

During the revision process, discussions took place in a range of fora, including through the mailing list, at face-to-face events, or through webinars. However, substantive points should always be written up as part of the GitHub issues to ensure changes are documented and justified.

A [peer-review stage in OCDS revision provided an opportunity for formal feedback on changes](https://github.com/open-contracting/standard/issues/429), and was facilitated through the creation of a spreadsheet template that experts could work through.

## Conformance and deprecation policies

A standard needs policies on:

- Conformance
- Deprecation

For example, see the OCDS [conformance](http://standard.open-contracting.org/latest/en/schema/conformance_and_extensions/) and [deprecation](http://standard.open-contracting.org/latest/en/schema/deprecation/) policies