GTFS Schedule - Minor updates to make governance more flexible

This issue aims to update the **GTFS Schedule governance**, following the first revision after its [adoption last year](https://github.com/google/transit/pull/544).

A [discussion](https://github.com/google/transit/discussions/625) was initiated last month to collect feedback for improvement ideas from active GTFS contributors.

Two updates have been identified as improvements to make the governance process easier.

### 1. Removing the requirement of a review period for documentation maintenance

For typo fixes and minor updates to the documentation, the mandatory 7-day discussion period + 7-day review period seems inefficient. Although changes must remain traceable via Pull Requests open to all, we could implement a fast track for documentation maintenance. As an example,[ this PR](https://github.com/google/transit/pull/615) from MobilityData did not strictly follow the full governance process.

### 2. Building trust with more evidence during testing

When a change has been tested in a rider-facing app, a screenshot or a link to the implementation could help build mutual trust regarding what has actually been tested.

We suggest adding this requirement for applicable scenarios.

**Supporting smaller agencies with GTFS adoption**

One suggestion shared in the discussion was about ensuring GTFS accessibility and closing the consumer adoption gap. While governance should remain as clear and simple as possible for agencies of any size, we think this focus belongs more to MobilityData’s mission than to the GTFS governance itself.

To be more specific, two initiatives align with this direction:

- Released in June 2026, the [GTFS Features Adoption Tracker](https://mobilitydatabase.org/gtfs-feature-tracker) allows everyone to see which consumers adopt specific features.
- We are currently implementing outreach programs in different regions. As part of this effort, we are considering a survey specifically addressed to small agencies over the next few months.

We will leave this issue open for feedback before proposing a pull request soon. Please share your thoughts if you have any additional ideas!

Read discussion #625 and the example PR #615 first to understand the proposed governance changes and how documentation maintenance was handled. The issue is awaiting feedback before a pull request is proposed; done would be an agreed governance update captured in a pull request.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.