SEP-932: Model Context Protocol Governance
seps/932-model-context-protocol-governance
History
seps/932-model-context-protocol-governance First recorded · 126 lines, first recorded
# SEP-932: Model Context Protocol Governance ## Abstract ## Motivation ## Rationale ### Hierarchical Structure ### Individual vs Corporate Membership ### SEP Process ## Specification ### Governance Structure #### Contributors #### Maintainers #### Core Maintainers #### Lead Maintainers ## Backwards Compatibility ## Reference Implementation ## Security Implications
The first capture of this source. The page was already there, and this is what it said.
# SEP-932: Model Context Protocol Governance
> Model Context Protocol Governance
<div className="flex items-center gap-2 mb-4">
<Badge color="green" shape="pill">
Final
</Badge>
<Badge color="gray" shape="pill">
Process
</Badge>
</div>
<Note>
This SEP has reached Final status and is preserved as a historical record of
the design as accepted. Changes made to the protocol after finalization are
not reflected here. Refer to the [current
specification](/specification/latest) and its changelog for authoritative
requirements.
</Note>
| Field | Value |
| ------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **SEP** | 932 |
| **Title** | Model Context Protocol Governance |
| **Status** | Final |
| **Type** | Process |
| **Created** | 2025-07-08 |
| **Author(s)** | David Soria Parra |
| **Sponsor** | None |
| **PR** | [#931](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol/pull/931) |
***
## Abstract
This SEP establishes the formal governance model for the Model Context Protocol (MCP) project. It defines the organizational structure, decision-making processes, and contribution guidelines necessary for transparent and effective project stewardship. The proposal introduces a hierarchical governance structure with clear roles and responsibilities, along with the Specification Enhancement Proposal (SEP) process for managing protocol changes.
## Motivation
As the Model Context Protocol grows in adoption and complexity, the need for formal governance becomes critical. The current informal decision-making process lacks:
1. **Transparency**: Community members have no clear visibility into how decisions are made
2. **Participation Pathways**: Contributors lack defined ways to influence project direction
3. **Accountability**: No formal structure exists for resolving disputes or contentious issues
4. **Scalability**: Ad-hoc processes cannot scale with growing community and technical complexity
Without formal governance, the project risks:
* Fragmentation of the ecosystem
* Unclear or inconsistent technical decisions
* Reduced community trust and participation
* Inability to effectively manage contributions at scale
## Rationale
The proposed governance model draws inspiration from successful open source projects like Python, PyTorch, and Rust. Key design decisions include:
### Hierarchical Structure
We chose a hierarchical model (Contributors โ Maintainers โ Core Maintainers โ Lead Maintainers) that is effectively how the project decisions are made today. From there we will continue to evolve governance in the best interest of the project.
### Individual vs Corporate Membership
Membership is explicitly tied to individuals rather than companies to:
* Ensure decisions prioritize protocol integrity over corporate interests
* Prevent capture by any single organization
* Maintain continuity when individuals change employers
### SEP Process
The Specification Enhancement Proposal process ensures:
* All protocol changes undergo thorough review
* Community input is systematically collected
* Design decisions are documented for posterity
* Implementation precedes finalization
## Specification
### Governance Structure
#### Contributors
* Any individual who files issues, submits pull requests, or participates in discussions
* No formal membership or approval required
#### Maintainers
* Responsible for specific components (SDKs, documentation, etc.)
* Appointed by Core Maintainers
* Have write/admin access to their repositories
* May establish component-specific processes
#### Core Maintainers
* Deep understanding of MCP specification required
* Responsible for protocol evolution and project direction
* Meet bi-weekly for decisions
* Can veto maintainer decisions by majority vote
* Current members listed in governance documentation
#### Lead Maintainers
* Justin Spahr-Summers and David Soria Parra
* Can veto any decision
* Appoint/remove Core Maintainers
* Admin access to all infrastructure
## Backwards Compatibility
N/A
## Reference Implementation
See #931
1. **Documentation Files**:
* `/docs/community/governance.mdx` - Full governance documentation
* `/docs/community/sep-guidelines.mdx` - SEP process guidelines
## Security Implications
N/A