Requesting suggestions from GH Management for prow extension

[gkarthiks]

Hi GitHub Management Team,

Based on the discussion in the WG Naming here, this issue is to request suggestion/comment on the following proposal.

Problem Statement:

There are few terms that are considered offensive/biased that appear or enter into Kubernetes world only via issues(or most commonly via issues). These are created by all the stakeholders of Kubernetes.

Proposed Solution:

Based on the above-linked GG discussion, we are requesting suggestions/comments on extending the Prow Plugin that will start soon after the issue is created and scans the content of the issue. If there are any offensive/biased terms mentioned in the content of the issue, a comment will be created addressing the author stating that they need to address those terms with alternatives.

PS: We already do this in K8s and CNCF Slack.

Addressing to:

• GH Management
  • @cblecker
  • @spiffxp
  • @fejta
  • @idvoretskyi
  • @justaugustus
  • @mrbobbytables
  • @nikhita

[gkarthiks]

/area github-management
/sig contributor-experience
/wg naming

[nikhita]

@kubernetes/wg-naming-leads -- can you please confirm if you'd like to go ahead with this feature?

From the contribex side, I will add it to next meeting's agenda.

[mrbobbytables]

While I approve of the intent behind this. I don't think it'll have the intended impact. People don't look at the messages from our bots as it is :(

[gkarthiks]

@nikhita @celestehorgan @mrbobbytables so what should we do? just drop this idea and see better options in future? Looking for some direction guide here pls.

[nikhita]

@nikhita @celestehorgan @mrbobbytables so what should we do? just drop this idea and see better options in future? Looking for some direction guide here pls.

I agree with @mrbobbytables -- we have too many bot comments today (related #3621) and I don't think this would have the intended impact either.

[mrbobbytables]

so what should we do? just drop this idea and see better options in future? Looking for some direction guide here pls.

I would drop for now, or potentially freeze the idea. I think there are other areas where we should focus our efforts for greater impact. There are a lot of repos that still need to be migrated from master -> main, and effort within various projects to switch away from non-inclusive language.

[gkarthiks]

As per the suggestions from @justaugustus in the WG Monthly meeting(May 17th, 2021), I will take this idea to the INI group and check how are they approaching this in a broader spectrum.

I will circle back with the findings/approach from there, document it here, and will close this issue. No further actions are needed here. So assigning it to myself.

/assign gkarthiks