When it comes to the core technical team, I think it's clear that the only criterion for membership will be one's technical skill and contributions to the project. I can't see us using political criteria ("is this person funded by XYZ? Does this person own a consulting company?") in this process.
In terms of the broader view of governance, obviously a much wider range of people will be involved. It's still hard for me to see us wanting to impose political limitations on who can be part of the leadership group of the project at large. If someone's contributing as a leader then why wouldn't we want to recognize them as a leader formally?
Of course my experience with non-profit and volunteer organizations has always been at the grass-roots level. I left the last board I served on when the organization chose to change the board from being composed of its most influential volunteer leaders to being a board chosen for political reasons.
