As part of the management of the MVSP project, we need to ensure clear guidelines are in place to manage areas of release, reference, contribution, and partner management. With this in mind we would recommend the following steps be taken in order to ensure the auditability of the underlying MVSP baseline, and overall governance of the project moving forwards.

Working Group Management

Onboarding and Offboarding

The MVSP site has the official list of the working group members and as such the information is stored in GitHub with the rest of the content. In order to become a working group member a company must:

  • agree to list their company name and/or logo amongst the supporters on the MVSP website;
  • maintain at least two points of contact within their respective companies willing to participate in meetings;
  • agree to follow the change management process and the guidelines.

In order to withdraw membership information from the MVSP website, the member must follow the change management process described further down in this document. The change will be reflected upon the next release of MVSP.

Working Group Meetings

A quarterly webinar will be held where any and all of the working group members are welcome. Invitations will be sent out to the points of contacts. As members are coming from multiple different time zones, the dates/times can vary to better fit availability.

Change Management Process

The MVSP documentation and website are currently planned to be hosted on Github in a repository owned and managed by the MVSP working group, in order to allow community commentary/contribution and easy adoption by interested third parties.

Escalating a draft to release

When a new draft is completed and is ready for publication, the following steps should be taken:

  1. A locked draft version should be created by the MVSP editors for final review.
  2. This version will be shared to the working group for input.
  3. The release wording is finalized by the editors. It may undergo a techwriter review for large-scale changes.
  4. Any significant changes from final review will be shared back to the working group for acceptance.
  5. Upon completion of this, the new version will be published and locked.


When releasing a new version of the MVSP (after appropriate review), the version number should be set and locked within Github in order to ensure that references to that revision of MVSP reference that release without any future modifications. All releases should be maintained in a locked state once published, with only typos being accepted to already published versions.

Version number

The version number should contain the date at which the draft was published as live (e.g. 20201124) in order to ensure that it is clear when this version was elevated from draft to full release.

Submissions (Pull requests)

Pull requests should only be accepted against the current draft version and not directly against a published version (with the exception of minor typos). After the group has had the possibility to review PULL requests and sufficient consensus is reached, PULL requests can be merged. Merging will need the general consensus of the editorial team. In the event of a dispute over whether a change should be incorporated, an additional ad hoc meeting of working group members or editors may be called to discuss issues and reach reasonable consensus.

External input

Input from external parties (outside the working group) should be reviewed by the working group prior to being accepted.

Release cadence

Releasing a new public version of the MVSP should be done on an annual basis, with an official review starting 90 days prior to the expected release date.

For changes that are deemed as urgent and critical to the MVSP (e.g material corrections), interim releases can be made on ad hoc basis to correct the specific issue (larger-scale changes unrelated to the issue at hand should be pushed back to the annual release and not integrated).

Contribution Guidelines

MVSP is designed to be simple, understandable and minimalistic. It must be considered that the goal is not to become another complex standard. Before sending a PULL request contributors should always ask themselves the question: Could I consider a vendor secure if they did not comply with the control I am adding? If the answer is yes, then the control should not be there.