@zkatkat I've long felt that, just like we have a plethora of standard licenses to pick from, we should also have more named and documented governance models, because these two are separate dimensions that tell you something about the "openness" of a project.

You can be closed source but with community (led or involved) governance, you can be (corporate) open source without any community involvement at all, and many shades between. This wouldn't be captured in the license, but in some kind of governance contract with the community.