Define responsibilities of a SIG PM representative

[justaugustus]

In the SIG Governance / Creation doc, we mention:

Represent the SIG for the PM group

We should better define the responsibilities of a SIG PM representative, as this doesn't seem to be documented.

(this was a comment from @rsdcastro on this Google Sheet)

ref: #2122
/assign @calebamiles @apsinha @idvoretskyi

[k8s-ci-robot]

@justaugustus: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: apsinha.

Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can be assigned.

In response to this:

In the SIG Governance / Creation doc, we mention:

Represent the SIG for the PM group

We should better define the responsibilities of a SIG PM representative, as this doesn't seem to be documented.

(this was a comment from @rsdcastro on this Google Sheet)

ref: #2122
/assign @calebamiles @apsinha @idvoretskyi

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[justaugustus]

/sig pm

[jdumars]

There is a lot in this that needs to be re-examined. First, SIG-PM is not in an organized enough state to demand such representation. Also, it is my belief that SIG-PM should be staffing the SIGs as needed, and not the other way around. Having an identified contact for SIGs with features in a release makes sense when questions arise, but I'm not sure of the other value. @idvoretskyi may have a different opinion.

[parispittman]

+1 to Jaice's comment - In contribex, our members attend other sig meetings and spread the word as advocates. We tell folks to monitor our comms(mailing lists, etc.) but don't assign representation.

[justaugustus]

@jdumars / @parispittman -- that said, I think there's still some confusion, at the very least for me, on a few points:

• in SIG Governance & Creation doc, it mentions representing the SIG for SIG PM. If that's not / no longer a requirement, it should be removed. If it actually is a requirement, then the list should either be updated or removed and just defaulted to SIG Chairs
• the current SIG PM rep responsibilities seem to overlap a little with responsibilities of a Feature Owner in the k/features repo. Are we saying that we instead want the SIG Chairs to officially shepard features? If so, we need explicitly that as a responsibility of a SIG Chair and modify the requirements for filing & maintaining features in k/features.