I suggest an update to the MR review policy (currently there’s no real policy, just accountabilities mentioned at the bottom of https://git.snowdrift.coop/sd/governance/blob/master/Website-Circle.md).
In the case of significant design overhauls (like swapping out a page, adding a new page that wasn’t there, or major UI modifications), such work should not be merged and deployed until reviewed by the design roles (so, @msiep and @mray ). Exceptions for anything urgent, of course. And maybe specify some time frame (48 hours?) after which we may move forward even without review (because we don’t want to let MRs get stale or stalled).
That sounds reasonable but I think it should be @mray or @msiep reviewing the MR. Given availability, I don’t think waiting for both of them is practical (though we certainly can if there’s no rush to merge).
Rather than bake in rules for making huge, sweeping changes, I would rather make such changes rare. They can be handled on a case-by-case basis.
On a policy basis, perhaps we want the should-be-obvious statement that any time something seems huge, sweeping, major, etc. we should be sure to do extra clear communication and describe case-by-case what reviews should happen.
Broadly, I think if we establish more regular governance meetings, the concern will work itself out. I hope to do that in line with the Sociocracy 3.0 tools I’m slowly bringing in and learning about (not because we couldn’t figure it out on our own, but I think we’ll have a shorter path by avoiding wheel reinvention where we can).