Remove references to OTC and OMC

[t8m]

Also remove inapplicable policies.

[t8m]

@mattcaswell fixup pushed accepting all your proposed changes.

[t8m]

ping @t-j-h @arapov for this minimal necessary change approval

[t-j-h]

A summary of the changes in terms of whether they require agreement ("and") or either organisation can act unilaterally "or".

I don't think we have the mix correct or consistent here. I think the conservative approach is to have "and" and the liberal approach is to have "or" and we really should be consistent.

I would expect "or" or "and" for everything against each policy - and the branch policy is a mix. I would be happy with all being "and" or all being "or" and that "or" actually reflects more of what we have been doing - where either the corporation or the foundation can make the decision - we seek consensus, but consensus is not required if either organisation feels that a specific issue better represents the needs of their community focus.

I think the stronger controls (the "and" usage) on the release requirements does make sense.

Branch Policy

Override for backfits: or
API/ABI breakage: or
Future major branch updates: and
Future minor branch features: or
Future minor branch updates: or
Branch creation: and

Release Requirements

Release objectives set: and
First beta: engineering-managers and
Major and minor releases: engineering-managers and
Responsibility for meeting requirements: engineering-managers and
Performance testing requirements: engineering-managers and

[t8m]

@t-j-h @mattcaswell please look again

[t-j-h]

Looks good. Thanks for the updates!

[vavroch2010]

Not sure if in all cases, should be "and" between OSF and OSS, as in some sentences makes sense also "or"

[t8m]

This was merged manually.