Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[WIP] Propose updates to the SIG ContribEx Charter #3526

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
from

Conversation

@castrojo
Copy link
Contributor

castrojo commented Mar 28, 2019

This is a work in progress and needs community discussion.

Things that end up not belonging to anyone end up being owned by Contrib Ex. This is a first draft at nailing down exactly what we should be responsible for and what we should not be responsible for.

Note that this effectively removes ContribEx as the default moderator of all the kubernetes properties. The project will still need this work to get done, so where appropriate I've moved that back to the SIGs, and for everything else it will require discussion or perhaps a new community structure to manage those things.

Changes:

  • Explicitly add Kubernetes Gsuite as a responsibility
  • Explicitly add CNCF as the lead owner of Zoom, YouTube, and Slack
    accounts
  • Begin to document responsibilities around contributor summits between
    this SIG and the CNCF
  • Explicitly remove moderation of social properties as a responsility
  • Explicitly remove closing down working groups as a responsibility
  • Explicitly remove SIG Calendar, lists, YouTube playlists, and Zoom
    settings as a responsibility

/hold
/sig contributor-experience

Propose updates to the SIG ContribEx Charter:
- Explicitly add Kubernetes Gsuite as a responsibility
- Explicitly add CNCF as the lead owner of Zoom, YouTube, and Slack
accounts
- Begin to document responsibilities around contributor summits between
this SIG and the CNCF
- Explicitly remove moderation of social properties as a responsility
- Explicitly remove closing down working groups as a responsibility
- Explicitly remove SIG Calendar, lists, YouTube playlists, and Zoom
settings as a responsibility

Signed-off-by: Jorge O. Castro <jorgec@vmware.com>
@timothysc
Copy link
Member

timothysc left a comment

Generally approve but I want to make certain michelle and brandon respond to this.

@@ -76,14 +70,29 @@ CNCF in many of the noted cases above, contributes funding to our platforms, pro
- Code for the testing and CI infrastructure - that’s SIG Testing
- [kubernetes/community] ownership of folders for KEPs and Design Proposals. Members are to follow those folders owners files and SIG leadership for the specific issue/PR in question.
- User community management. We hold office hours because contributors are a large portion of the volunteers that run that program.
- Slack or YouTube moderation (This should be a new SIG or another group)

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@timothysc

timothysc Mar 28, 2019

Member

@michelleN @philips - We should delegate explicit ownership & mgmt to a CNCF group.

/hold

for steering feedback to make certain we fine ownership of these things.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

our youtube channel is primarily contributor use though and will be happy to have it stay with us - we also stream and would be a roadblock to have another owner here

slack is not contributor majority and should indeed be owned by another body

@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Mar 28, 2019

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: castrojo, timothysc

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md Outdated
Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md Outdated
- [Zoom]
- Establish and staff teams responsible for the administration and moderation of these platforms
- Teams must be staffed by trusted contributors spanning time zones, see [moderation] for more detail
- They are authorized to take immediate action when dealing with code of conduct issues, see [moderators] for the full list

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

this should stay - whatever platforms we decide we own, they should be staffed and take action

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@jberkus

jberkus Apr 9, 2019

Contributor

This seems like Jorge is proposing that Contribex not be responsible for ANY of the platforms.

@@ -12,21 +12,15 @@ We do this by listening - whether it’s through our roadshows to SIG meetings,

#### Code, Binaries and Services

- Establish policies, standards and procedures for the use, [moderation], and management of all public platforms officially used by the project, including but not limited to:

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

any platform that contributors are the majority, we should have operational responsibilities

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

these are the transparency tools of the project that steering works out in governance docs and should have operational responsibility with contributor experience. in the case where users are the majority, there needs to be some shared ownership, if not complete control and operational responsibility changed to them.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

them = a body that has end user community at its mission

Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md Outdated
Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md Outdated
Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md
Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md Outdated
Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md Outdated
Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md Outdated
Show resolved Hide resolved sig-contributor-experience/charter.md Outdated
- Maintenance of the Kubernetes Gsuite
- Managing @kubernetes.io aliases for project usage
- Managing the Kubernetes Community Calendar
- Content and Format of the [Contributor Summit(s)]

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

and running the meetings and providing project management

@@ -76,14 +70,29 @@ CNCF in many of the noted cases above, contributes funding to our platforms, pro
- Code for the testing and CI infrastructure - that’s SIG Testing
- [kubernetes/community] ownership of folders for KEPs and Design Proposals. Members are to follow those folders owners files and SIG leadership for the specific issue/PR in question.
- User community management. We hold office hours because contributors are a large portion of the volunteers that run that program.
- Slack or YouTube moderation (This should be a new SIG or another group)

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

our youtube channel is primarily contributor use though and will be happy to have it stay with us - we also stream and would be a roadblock to have another owner here

slack is not contributor majority and should indeed be owned by another body

- We are not the [code of conduct committee] and therefore do not control incident management reporting or decisions; however, our moderation guidelines allow us to act swiftly if there is a clear violation of terms of either our code of conduct or one of our supported platforms terms of service. If there is an action that the committee needs to take that involves one of these platforms (example: the removal of someone from GitHub), we will carry that out if none of the committee members have access.
- SIG Properties
- SIG Calendars and their settings

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

we are responsible for the upkeep of the shared calendar and making sure that is working

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

we also advise on settings and best practices in order to display on shared calendar or wherever

- We are not the [code of conduct committee] and therefore do not control incident management reporting or decisions; however, our moderation guidelines allow us to act swiftly if there is a clear violation of terms of either our code of conduct or one of our supported platforms terms of service. If there is an action that the committee needs to take that involves one of these platforms (example: the removal of someone from GitHub), we will carry that out if none of the committee members have access.
- SIG Properties
- SIG Calendars and their settings
- SIG Mailing List permissions, moderation, and maintenance

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

we advise on this and come up with guidelines

- SIG Calendars and their settings
- SIG Mailing List permissions, moderation, and maintenance
- SIG YouTube playlist videos
- SIG settings on their Zoom account

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

we advise and set up guidelines

- SIG Properties
- SIG Calendars and their settings
- SIG Mailing List permissions, moderation, and maintenance
- SIG YouTube playlist videos

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Mar 28, 2019

Contributor

we advise and set up guidelines

Make it more explicit that contribex sets policy but isn't responsible
for ownership, moderation, and administration.

Signed-off-by: Jorge O. Castro <jorgec@vmware.com>
@castrojo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

castrojo commented Mar 29, 2019

@parispittman ok PTAL, I've restructured it so we explicitly split setting policy (which should be contribex) and then the list of all the properties, and then having the matching list in the out-of-scope section.

@castrojo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

castrojo commented Mar 29, 2019

I beleive this should cover most of your comments where ContribEx should have policy control of the properties.

Reordering and structuring the bullets to be more concise and general in
order of importance

Signed-off-by: Jorge O. Castro <jorgec@vmware.com>
@@ -1,51 +1,45 @@
# Contributor Experience Special Interest Group Charter

This charter adheres to the conventions described in the [Kubernetes Charter README] and uses the Roles and Organization Management outlined in [sig-governance].

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Apr 1, 2019

Contributor

why did you remove this? this is a part of the charter template.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@cblecker

cblecker Apr 9, 2019

Member

agree with @parispittman's comment

- User community management. We hold office hours because contributors are a large portion of the volunteers that run that program.
- The contributor experience for repos not included in the Kubernetes associated repositories list found in the [GitHub Management] subproject README.
- Steering committee election policy updates and maintenance.
- [kubernetes/community] Members are to follow those folders owners files and SIG leadership for the specific issue/PR in question.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Apr 1, 2019

Contributor

what is those folders?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@castrojo

castrojo Apr 1, 2019

Author Contributor

The original text has "kubernetes/community ownership of folders for KEPs and Design Proposals. Members are to follow those folders owners files and SIG leadership for the specific issue/PR in question." but neither KEPs or Designs Proposals live in k/community anymore. Perhaps I should just cut out the entire bullet?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@mrbobbytables

mrbobbytables Apr 1, 2019

Member

Design proposals technically still live in k/community. They haven't been migrated to k/enhancements yet, but that is the intended home AFAIK.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@cblecker

cblecker Apr 9, 2019

Member

The intention of this is describing the fact that we own the repo as a whole, and the operational processes around the repo, but we delegate certain subfolders to other sigs/parts of the project. For example, we own the sig docs generator and the root, but we don't own the steering committee folder, or the the various sig folders. If we delegate it, we don't own it.

- [Group Mentoring - WIP]
- [The 1:1 Hour - WIP]
- Speed Mentoring sessions at selected KubeCon/CloundNativeCon's
- Help onboard new and current contributors into the culture, workflow, and CI of our contributor experience through the [contributor guide], other related documentation, [contributor summits] and programs tailored to onboarding.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Apr 1, 2019

Contributor

why remove this?

- [The 1:1 Hour - WIP]
- Speed Mentoring sessions at selected KubeCon/CloundNativeCon's
- Help onboard new and current contributors into the culture, workflow, and CI of our contributor experience through the [contributor guide], other related documentation, [contributor summits] and programs tailored to onboarding.
- Perform issue triage on and maintain the [kubernetes/community] repository.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Apr 1, 2019

Contributor

why remove this?

- Perform issue triage on and maintain the [kubernetes/community] repository.
- Help SIGs with being as transparent and open as possible through creating best practices, guidelines, and general administration of YouTube, Zoom, and our mailing lists where applicable
- Assist SIGs/WG Chairs and Technical Leads with organizational management operations as laid out in the [sig-governance] doc
- Distribute contributor related news on various Kubernetes channels, including Cloud Native Compute Foundation ([CNCF]) for posting blogs, social media, and other platforms as needed.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Apr 1, 2019

Contributor

this seems relevant - why are we removing this?

- Help SIGs with being as transparent and open as possible through creating best practices, guidelines, and general administration of YouTube, Zoom, and our mailing lists where applicable
- Assist SIGs/WG Chairs and Technical Leads with organizational management operations as laid out in the [sig-governance] doc
- Distribute contributor related news on various Kubernetes channels, including Cloud Native Compute Foundation ([CNCF]) for posting blogs, social media, and other platforms as needed.
- Establish and share metrics to measure project health, community health, and general trends, including:

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@parispittman

parispittman Apr 1, 2019

Contributor

why remove these?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@castrojo

castrojo Apr 1, 2019

Author Contributor

For your last three comments: It shows as removed in the diff because I shuffled around the order, you have to switch to viewing the whole document to see the new order.

Fix CNCF acronym description
Signed-off-by: Jorge O. Castro <jorgec@vmware.com>
@parispittman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

parispittman commented Apr 4, 2019

i brought up moving moderation to the code of conduct committee to get folks thoughts. we have a meeting next week. maybe a temp move until something else is found? unsure - wip thoughts.

Be more specific that moderation duties should be a new SIG.
Signed-off-by: Jorge O. Castro <jorgec@vmware.com>

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/L and removed size/M labels Apr 4, 2019

@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Apr 4, 2019

@castrojo: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun them all:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
pull-community-verify b4f3218 link /test pull-community-verify

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@castrojo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

castrojo commented Apr 4, 2019

Ok I've added fixes based on the comments I've resolved so far and made it more clear where we need a new SIG instead of just "CNCF".

@vllry

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

vllry commented Apr 4, 2019

👍

@cblecker
Copy link
Member

cblecker left a comment

I'll reply to the e-mail list with general thoughts, but this is very tough to review. It attempts to change both scope, as well as an organizational rewrite.

@@ -1,51 +1,45 @@
# Contributor Experience Special Interest Group Charter

This charter adheres to the conventions described in the [Kubernetes Charter README] and uses the Roles and Organization Management outlined in [sig-governance].

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@cblecker

cblecker Apr 9, 2019

Member

agree with @parispittman's comment

- User community management. We hold office hours because contributors are a large portion of the volunteers that run that program.
- The contributor experience for repos not included in the Kubernetes associated repositories list found in the [GitHub Management] subproject README.
- Steering committee election policy updates and maintenance.
- [kubernetes/community] Members are to follow those folders owners files and SIG leadership for the specific issue/PR in question.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@cblecker

cblecker Apr 9, 2019

Member

The intention of this is describing the fact that we own the repo as a whole, and the operational processes around the repo, but we delegate certain subfolders to other sigs/parts of the project. For example, we own the sig docs generator and the root, but we don't own the steering committee folder, or the the various sig folders. If we delegate it, we don't own it.

- [discuss.kubernetes.io]
- [GitHub Management]
- [GitHub Project Organizational Management]

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@cblecker

cblecker Apr 9, 2019

Member

What does this mean?

@jberkus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

jberkus commented Apr 9, 2019

Jorge:

Can you spell out why you think we should remove each item, whether because:

  1. You don't think that ContribEx should be responsible for them at all (e.g. WG shutdown)
  2. We can't be responsible for them because of CNCF account ownership/controls, or
  3. We can't staff them because not enough people

It might even be helpful if we break out the big question (moderating/owning community channels) from the other incidental responsibilities (WG, calendar, youtube).

Also, won't questions around mailing list ownership change if we get a community-controlled GSuite?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.