diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive')
7 files changed, 6644 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2017-meeting-notes.md b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2017-meeting-notes.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..6b0ee130 --- /dev/null +++ b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2017-meeting-notes.md @@ -0,0 +1,346 @@ +## December 7, 2017 + +* **Bosun**: Brandon Philips [CoreOS] (@brandonphilips) +* **Note Taker**: Brandon Philips [CoreOS] (@brandonphilips) +* **Attendees** + * Aaron Crickenberger [Samsung SDS] + * Brandon Philips [CoreOS] + * Brendan Burns [Microsoft] + * Brian Grant [Google] + * Clayton Coleman [Redhat] + * Derek Carr [Red Hat] + * Joe Beda [Heptio] + * Phillip Wittrock [Google] + * Michelle Noorali [Microsoft] + * Sarah Novotny [Google] + * Timothy St Clair [Heptio] + * Tim Hockin [Google] +* **Absent** + * Quinton Hoole [Huawei] +* **Topics** + * Discussion around steering committee velocity and breaking into smaller teams + * **Proposal**: Do weekly standups and break into 2-3 teams that tackle 2-3 issues a month + * [Draft values discussion](https://docs.google.com/document/d/12J0YLKBOfBTMd8ZdPpFMIAhMmGIfapMg-nkYPJYY7FY/edit) - everyone says it looks good + +**Iteration Teams** + +* **Values**: Sarah, Brendan (everyone LGTM) +* **Owners**: Brian, Aaron +* **SIG Interfaces: **Phillip, Joe, Michelle +* **Charter Cleanup: **Clayton, Tim, Derek (amendment language) + +**Actions** + +* Philips: update the backlog.md to show the sprint [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/13](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/13) + +## November 8, 2017 + +* **Bosun**: Aaron Crickenberger [Samsung SDS] (@spiffxp) +* **Note Taker**: Sarah Novotny [Google] (@sarahnovotny) +* **Attendees** + * Aaron Crickenberger [Samsung SDS] + * Sarah Novotny [Google] + * Tim Hockin {Google} + * Brian Grant [Google] + * Joe Beda [Heptio] + * Michelle Noorali [Microsoft] + * Derek Carr [Red Hat] + * Brendan Burns [Microsoft] + * Timothy St Clair [Heptio] + * Clayton Coleman [Redhat] +* **Topics** + * Administrivia + * Public meeting notes: this doc? Separate doc? .md in k/steering repo? + * Read only publishing of the steering committee agenda + * AI -- Aaron to read before pushing publish to kubernetes-dev@ + * Public meeting recording: where do we want to post these? + * Kubernetes YouTube Channel -- @jorge can help create a playlist + * AI -- Joe to reach out to Jorge + * [Do we need to ratify Michelle as CNCF GB rep with a vote?](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/9) + * Nope -- announced on twitter so it must be true. + * Next Bosun: Any volunteers? If we’re still going alphabetically by first name (thanks for that), it’s Brandon + * Brandon next Bosun in either December or January. + * December meetings + * Still an open question. + * Action Item followup + * [steering@k8s.io](mailto:steering@k8s.io), [steering-private@k8s.io](mailto:steering-private@k8s.io) have been created, thanks Tim + * Need final clarity on subscribe-ability of steering@ + * Yes, subscribable. But, committee reserves the right to move conversations to other lists. + * AI -- Tim steering-private Publicly postable (done) + * Do we have a document that describes when/how to use them? Consensus? + * k/steering has a CONTRIBUTING.md, thanks Joe + * AI -- michelle make PR + * Discuss the charter: are we ready to ratify? + * Sounded like Tim SC had some thoughts + * Strip the existing doc into mission, scope, outline + * Move the election content into another doc. + * Must improve the MoS definition. + * Propose a PR and get LGTMs from each committee member? + * Committee’s responsibility for a charter. Comments from the community will be considered, but not necessarily addressed. + * Scope: Streamline charter + * Remove bootstrap language + * Defer MoS update + * **Add Amendment process** + * ⅔ of the steering committee and one week notice + * Lazy consensus for everyday biz + * AI -- Derek -- Amendment language + * AI -- Tim St Clair -- streamline charter. + * Incubation + * Where do we stand on this? + * Review of incubator projects -- in/out? + * What is the architectural vision of the kubernetes project? + * Endorsement as a byproduct of graduation + * Ecosystem + * Brendan + * Sig sponsored -- scratch space - free form + * Incubator bestows “officialdom” / cla -- get rid of that + * Started on the outside do we want to bring it in? . + * Joe + * Another category + * Graduated already and don’t fit the new devs. + * \ + * Aaron + * 61 repos in k/ + * Brian doesn’t think we have enough + * Derek doesnt’ think they’re well enough bounded + * Tim St Clair + * Sunset period for projects which should exit the k/k space + * Potential org or set of orgs for these adjacent projects + * Brendan + * Sunsetting isn’t bad, but hard to make progress. + * Clayton -- + * If a sig decides to adopt something, who is a SIG? membership/vote. + * If sig node wants to put another container runtime into k/k are they able to? + * New project, yes. + * Existing project, no + * Brendan + * Saad is doing this with snapshopts… not in core. + * Clayton + * Prototype repos under SIG-CLI + * Brian + * No clear notion of decider for sig + * Derek + * Tied to owners in kube + * Joe + * That’s not the discussion we are having.. .but agree should be related to owners. + * Brendan + * SIG as owners… not k/k + * k/k can be draw in pieces from sigs + * Aaron + * Is Incubator the same as SIG scratch space? + * Brendan + * Contrib was a BAD + * Each SIG breaks the connection of kubernetes + * Clayton + * Sigs should be more independent + * Loose model works well for prototyping + * Derek + * What is the expectation of testing services + * Aaron + * Consistent tooling from kubernetes? Orthogonal to our incubation process + * Need to unblock people who are trying to put projects in k/k and or incubator. + * Brendan + * Don’t want to start in a new org == blessing + * Kubernetes-sig-cli org etc. + * Playground + * Aaron + * What is the architectural vision? + * What is the k8s project? + * What repos fit that vision? + * What is the mapping from sig <-> repo? + * A few people from this group need to work offline and discover what the boundaries might be. + * Brendan + * Not trying to retro organize + * Trying to give space to explore without blessing everyhing + * Joe + * Do need to go through the exiting repos + * Fairness for incubators + * Brian + * We’re rehashing + * Review the docs. We’re mostly in agreement + * Derek + * Merit looking at incubator repos + * Sig vs playground? + * Brian + * Eventually want every piece of code to be assigned to a sig. + * Other than k/k k/docs …. Are cross project mono repos + * Michelle + * Org for each sig? + * Brian + * Api-machinery will need multiple orgss + * Main driver for more orgs == permissions + * Overhead of admin is messy either way + * AI -- Brendan write a document to walk through incubator list and find patterns of in/out/ bubble + * AI -- Brian write a document for what to bring to the architecture for new repos + * Brian + * Unblock organic growth + * SIG org veto was around no decision process inside the sigs. + * Matt’s doc: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DjPSKe01a4BLi2cxUENTbQZGmANhumt8LQVz03wiiAw/edit#](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DjPSKe01a4BLi2cxUENTbQZGmANhumt8LQVz03wiiAw/edit#) + * Phil’s doc: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_FBm9zR4vU2X3-j-jSGlDPIkXweQbc_x6Fc6Ph0OupQ/edit](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_FBm9zR4vU2X3-j-jSGlDPIkXweQbc_x6Fc6Ph0OupQ/edit) + * Kubecon + * We have one more f2f meeting prior to Kubecon, is there anything we need to prioritize? +* **Action Items** + +## October 25, 2017 - + +* **Bosun**: Aaron Crickenberger [Samsung SDS] (@spiffxp) +* **Note Taker**: Brandon Philips [CoreOS] (@philips) +* **Attendees** + * Joe Beda, Tim St. Clair [Heptio] + * Aaron Crickenberger, [Samsung SDS] + * Derek Carr, Clayton Coleman [Red Hat] + * Phillip Wittrock, Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Tim Hockin [Google] + * Brandon Philips [CoreOS] NOTE TAKER! + * Michelle Noorali, Brendan Burns [Microsoft] + * Quinton Hoole [Huawei] +* **Topics** + * Administrivia + * How do people contact us? + * Today: p2p or e-mail [steering@k8s.io](mailto:steering@k8s.io) + * Ideas: e-mail [steering-public@k8s.io](mailto:steering-public@k8s.io), #steering-committee slack, issues on kubernetes/steering + * **Consensus**: See AIs below + * How do we respond? + * Today: “we’re very busy, it’s in our backlog” + * **Consensus**: use the list + * How do we keep track of our ongoing backlog / priorities? + * Today: we have backlog.md in kubernetes/steering + * Ideas: this working doc, a spreadsheet, issues in kubernetes/steering, regular updates to backlog.md + * **Consensus:** using a backlog.md file and steering folks should just merge their own stuff. PR workflow reserved for CoC or something. Joe will write-up something. + * Do we record meetings? + * Today: we aren’t + * Ideas: what does our charter say? tick-tock a public recording, and a private meeting with no recording? + * **Consensus:** start meetings as not recording, confirm with the group before starting the recording early in the meeting + * What do we make public? + * Today: the contents of kubernetes/steering + * Ideas: what does our charter say? Public mailing list (separate from kubernetes-dev), public meeting notes (follow same tick-tock?), github issues etc + * **Consensus: **Default to public on recording and mailing list + * What is quorum for us? + * Meeting quorum? + * Decision / binding quorum? + * **Consensus: **Half + 1 on meetings to start, 2/3rd on votes for binding stuff. Consensus is the goal but not requirement. Future: modified [lazy consensus](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fRYZYQlCGv4ebMqwZE8BRzPbuGl8ElyaNr5CuEmaRyk/edit). + * Top 3 priorities ([spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ym3gXY7I1gs_RSqCfzeg7BlCZk0THAYc-jvVrLe0vDo/edit#gid=0)) + * Incubator + * What does being a Kubernetes project mean? + * Policy of accepting new code -> means it is a CNCF project + * Management of the GitHub orgs + * Decision process for how and when a project qualifies + * Problem: no clear way to reject +* What is motivating people to be an incubator project? + * Legal ownership of code + * Process support (bots, release, etc) + * Official blessing / endorsement + * "Neutral ownership" + * Visibility + * Bundling into releases +* What are we afraid of? + * Transferring legal ownership of code after it is produced +* Why do we feel this is urgent? + * Incubation projects coming up for being kicked out after 1yr + * No process is blocking to grandparent in old code + * Code of conduct + * SIG Charters + * Honorable mention: charter ratification + * Do we have an amendment process for the doc? + * [Charter](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/master/charter.md) +* Discussion around ownership and SIGs + * Misc questions ([spiffxp] we didn’t have time to get to these) + * [quinton] [Measuring the value of Kubernetes contributions]( https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/kubernetes-wg-contribex/UtfHQCvaKw4/qVu0yt4cBQAJ) - there’s a thread about this on sig-contribex, and I’ve offered to draft a proposal for review. Does the steering committee have any early input/opinions? + * [spiffxp] clarifying community-membership ladder + * These are coming from “we want a contributor mentorship program” + * Is the reviewers / approvers / maintainers distinction useful across all repos? + * are the numbers for each of these roles set in stone? +* **Action Items** + * **Tim Hockin: **own [steering@k8s.io](mailto:steering@k8s.io) and [steering-private@k8s.io](mailto:steering-private@k8s.io), rename existing list to -private, create a new steering that is world writeable and world readable but cannot be subscribed to + * ???: Document when we use each list: regular business happens on steering list and the steering-private is postable only by the team and how to engage with the steering committee + * **Joe Beda:** write a steering.git editing guideline -- done + * **Brandon Philips: **Send charter discussion to mailing list + * **All: **Discuss the charter on the public mailing list and get to consensus on ratification + +## October 18, 2017 - + +* **Bosun**: 404 +* **Note Taker**: Joe Beda - Heptio +* **Attendees** + * Joe Beda, Tim St. Clair - Heptio + * Sarah Novotny - Google + * Aaron Crickenberger - Samsung SDS + * Brian Grant - Google + * Phillip Wittrock - Google + * Tim Hockin - Google + * Michelle Noorali - Microsoft + * Brandon Philips - CoreOS +* **Topics** + * [sarahnovotny] Contributor Summit invitation selection + * Thread on selection. + * Need to pick something now. + * Options: + * 1. SIG leads and WG leads + SIG nominations + lottery + * 2. SIG leads and WG leads + lottery + * 3. Lottery + * a) from those that voted in election (300 people) + * b) members of standing + * **4. SIG leads WG leads + editorial quota + MoS lottery** + * Is it deliberately not on conf agenda? Yes -- because it is invite only. + * 150 people + * Contributor summit last time: + * SIG leads + approvers + 5 top companies to nominate people + lottery + * Allow transfers? No -- go to the next picked person, etc + * What are purposes? Can we make decisions? + * Mostly about getting on the same page and motivation + * Direct effort to the right areas + * Review what happened since leadership summit + * Joe is a broken record about his concerns around SIG leadership rights and responsibilities + * Use owners file? Already used for “members of standing” + * Quinton: We need to be careful here that we don’t use things created for one purpose for another purpose and offend folks. + * Tim: We were super lenient with member of standing list. May want to curate more for contrib summit. + * Quinton: do the least offensive thing and fix this going forward? + * Sarah: all of this is great but we need to get invites out ASAP + * Brian: get interest and then lottery? + * Tim/Tim: not enough time + * Brian: Pure lottery seems less than useful. We have + * [sarahnovotny] CNCF Project representation to the board + * This is the Governing Board -- business/marketing/serving + * Who from steering committee doesn’t want to be on board? + * Tim StC, Joe, Clayton, Derek, Quinton + * Brian, Sarah - have to deal with it already + * TimH - will do it if I have to + * Brandon - already there + * Left: Aaron, **Michelle**, Phil + * [jbeda] Curation of top things to address? + * Perhaps have everyone list their top three priorities and we can see what bubbles to the top? + * Project incubation + * Graduation + * CoC group + * [Backlog](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/master/backlog.md) for reference. + * Offline discussion + * Items in spreadsheet by fri + * Pull together agenda by tuesday + * [spiffxp] test-infra cluster funded by cncf? + * Current cluster under a google.com project, can’t add outside collaborators + * Want to run just the core test-infra stack (eg: prow, submit-queue, etc) on a cluster that non-googlers can help support + * Curious if this is the right place to handle this (or falls under top priority / backlog above) + * Notes: + * Aaron wants to see all tests to be run by non-googlers + * Tim: there is a GCP project but there is question on who/how it gets paid. + * Things that directly benefit cloud providers (GKE testing, GPU) should be funded by those providers + * Tim and Aaron to take this offline. + * [pwittroc] where do subprojects store container images & bits? + * Is this something we talk about today or later w/ backlog. Related to the test-infra item above + * GCR - more vanity name -- k8s.gcr.io will be a thing + * Can put any subdirectories we want in there. Can categorize. + * Easy transition outside of google + * [Brandon] Circling around some central tenants + * Domain names, hosting and billing needs to be owned by k8s project + * Questions to answer: + * Do we record meetings? + * Quinton/Aaron: I’m in favor of public but there is a lot of sensitive discussion that we need a safe space + * Brian: Public office hours? + * Do we have a “chair” or work via consensus? + * Monthly or quarterly rotation of speaker/whip + * Name:** Boatswain** + * Frequency:** Monthly** + * First Boatswain: **Aaron** + * What is open, what is closed? + * Brian: we should have an open email list for public business +* **Action items** + * Joe to pull together spreadsheet for folks to list their 3 top things from backlog and send mail to steering committee diff --git a/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2018-meeting-notes.md b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2018-meeting-notes.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..ed445988 --- /dev/null +++ b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2018-meeting-notes.md @@ -0,0 +1,1349 @@ +## Dec 5, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** spiffxp +* **Note Taker:** philips +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/jV9s1bt45rE](https://youtu.be/jV9s1bt45rE) +* **Attendees:** + * Aaron Crickenberger, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock (Google) + * Derek Carr, Clayton Coleman, Brandon Philips (Red Hat) + * Michelle Noorali, Brendan Burns (Microsoft) +* **Topics:** + * Contributor summit discussion (spiffxp) + * Any AI followups? + * We were going to try to push on charters, let’s see where we are on that + * Push on all charters reviewed - action items about pinging these + * AI About CLA + * AI Infra wg charter - make it “less sig like” - who created and owned subprojects (wg will find SIGs) + * Will have a couple SC folks for approval instead of a full re-review + * Brian + * Brandon can if reviewable by Wed of next week + * Going through the board + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * Contributing Structure + * AI Phil - follow up with Nikita + * Charters + * Contributor Experience + * Need to handoff to another SC member + * AI to Phil + * PM + * Big Data + * Don’t have consensus as to if this should be a SIG vs something else + * OK with being a SIG for now, can sort out whether this is the correct organizational structure next year + * Not worth changing just before kubecon and end of year + * Issue: Just because we have charters, doesn’t mean the state if finalized or the SIG will continue to exist as such + * Will leave charter with ‘/hold’ to avoid confusion w.r.t. charter merge status + * Docs + * Joe + Brian on the hook to be reviewers + * Seems lite + * Aaron can help review + * Cloud Charters + * Azure - before had template + * GCP - considering rolling into SIG cloud provider + * CNCF dev rep + * Continue to be Michelle + * Would be good to have more attendance at meeting - will bring up at SC meeting more with more advance - has been done before + * In future will go through agenda for GB at SC meeting if it is available (usually isn’t) + * K8s Infra to CNCF + * Need to add fields to working groups to reference the SIGs that are collaborating + * WGs + * Should be ephemeral, but some WG that seem to be permanent + * Should revisit these - should they be sub projects? + * Dependencies + * Need to be able to do a better job + * Have been vetting based off Licensing + * Need to vet based of confidence that the libraries don’t contain any vulnerabilities + * Dependencies keep getting reintroduced + * Need to review items on issue + * Need to make sure we are able to maintain a good state + * Have good people as gatekeepers, but impossible task for humans to audit all libraries + * _Need tooling to do CVE scanning_ + * Mostly driving changes that have been done in k/k to also be done in other repositories + * Can turn on github scanner that will give us a badge to put on repos - this is close + * Talked with legal rep from CNCF, he promised to scan all repos 1 more time at the start of the year + * Concerned that this is an attack vector + * If there is a good service, CNCF would pay for it + * RedHat might have something similar that could do this + * RH VS code plugin might have a CVE to dependency translator + * A good place to start + * Not focussed on subtle bugs - focussed on injection attacks + * Go dependencies makes this a good target for attack + * NodeJS + * Security Audit performed + * High priority item + * No one has a DB of go package CVEs + * Other languages have better support for metadata for CVEs + * Brendan to put together a proposal for how to deal with this problem (bring to f2f at kubecon) + * [Go CVE’s](https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-14185/product_id-29205/Golang-GO.html) + * SIG Release Charter Observations + * 2 things: + * How and when artifacts are released + * Declare a release for SC + * Lot of things in the charter that make SC the escalation point for everything in the project + * Who do we need involved in discussion as we move things out of tree - SIG Arc + SIG Release? Hopefully don’t need to bring SC into the conversation. + * SIGs should be able to collaborate if there is a policy change - Arc, Release, Docs, Testing, etc + * Need to do some clean up anyway + * Kubeup has been deprecated for 1+ years, but still in the release bundle and used for testing + * Contributor Summit planning + * Need to talk about what we have accomplished + * Worthwhile to talk about what we are planning to do for the coming year + * Security thing is top of mind + * Lot of governance bits are not completely done, but there is lite at the end of the tunnel + * Find a way to empower as many people as possible to move forward on these issues + * Move away from “SC” will do it + * SC plates are already super full + * Take advantage of role board - populate candidates + * Rationalization to make scope and size and organization of projects manageable + * Flat organizational structure makes it hard for new contributors to navigate + * What do we need to do to keep Kubernetes boring? + * Impart a desire to have the project focussed on health - de-flaking tests, putting gates in place, define alpha -> beta -> stable + * Google doc to discuss what we want to talk about? + * Smaller conferences instead of massive Kubecon + * Starting to see conferences focussed on ecosystem components + * More local events for people who can’t travel to big conferences + * At the conference there will be a session about making the conference better + * Thursday afternoon + * Will have Kubernetes day in Bangalore + * Super-Meetups style events could be popular + * Contributor summit + * Has been invite only in past to keep it a manageable in size + * Have used dev stats numbers in the past + * Seen a lot of people submitting random-typo PRs - trying to game the stats? + * One thing fixed this year - all of the sessions will be recorded (yay - thanks Paris) + * Some of the most valuable content - will be able to link to this + * Raw numbers to quantify contributor impact - hasn’t worked well + * In past was invite only - 100 folks + * Recently was 400 - seem like just a conference intro session - shouldn’t have been on the main page at all? + * Need to be careful of “who you know network” - going back to pure invite only not great either + * Being more clear about what the contributor summit is about would allow folks to self select + * Only want people who will be serious contributors to be coming + * How much of an issue is this + * It is definitely happening, but is it impacting decisions we are making - e.g. if we pull the top 100 are we going to see folks who have gotten there through gaming the system + * Kubernetes Steering Committee Thursday dinner/Friday meeting planning + * Please add to the [issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/87) if you have items to discuss + * Ratify Code of Conduct Committee Charter + * Private mailing list has some stuff about this - this is important to review + +## Nov 21, 2018 + +Canceled due to Thanksgiving + +## Nov 7, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Brendan Burns +* **Note Taker:** Aaron Crickenberger +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/I9qRE9DM1Tw](https://youtu.be/I9qRE9DM1Tw) +* **Attendees:** + * Aaron Crickenberger, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock, Sarah Novotny (Google) + * Dims (Huawei) + * Joe Beda, Timothy St Clair (Heptio) + * Brendan Burns (Microsoft) +* **Topics:** + * AI Followup: + * AI Aaron: Will send out some next steps off the call to steering (re: subprojects) + * AI Aaron: Move the SIG role stuff into the other governance doc + * AI Brendan Burns: Ping SIG Windows + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2875](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2875) - went in without SC reviewers + * AI Brendan Burns: Poke SIG Azure + * Charters Merged but needs another person to walk back and review + * AI Joe: Ping SIG AWS [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2733](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2733) + * Close, but pending lazy consensus. + * AI Aaron: Ping SIG PM + * Have not done: will do this week + * AI Dims: SIG Network + * PR is ready - [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2744](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2744) + * AI Dims: Chase down SIG Cloudprovider and SIG OpenStack merging + * Need to follow the new process to consolidating the OpenStack SIG + * AI Dims: understand how many PRs are blocked on CLA signing + * [15 open PRs](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22cncf-cla%3A+no%22) + * AI Dims: SIG Architecture meeting discussion on KEP for OpenStack extraction + * Done + * AI Dims/Aaron Review the Infra WG PR and see if we can make it feel less SIG like + * Not Done yet. + * [Tim] QQ - Do we want to approve WGs? Yes/No **[YES, but we reserve the right to delegate]** + * Going through the board + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * Philips: Recommendations for CNCF TOC nominations? + * Nominations close Nov 26th + * We could suggest people on steering-private@ + * If we’ve got objections we could decide not to nominate (effective lazy consensus) + * What criteria are we looking for? + * Brian can send notes about what TOC actually does + * It is a somewhat substantial time commitment, make sure we’re nominating people who can handle that + * Keep well qualified diverse candidates in mind + * Think broadly, beyond just Kubernetes, the TOC is a different kind of work than Kubernetes + * [Charters](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31): [SIG Apps has a charter](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2881/files) up that Brian wants to review + * Done! The charter LGTM. + * The KubeCons are eating up our time + * Upcoming meetings are going to be interleaved with them + * What kind of prep do we want to do with them + * Contributor summit stuff looks reasonable for Seattle + * We are going to cancel the next meeting because it is so close to thanksgiving + * But OK we’ll keep the Dec 5th meeting + * Maybe a good time to review our backlog and consider whether it’s worthwhile? + * AI: Joe to draft a document to describe the process by which we will avoid undue process + +## Oct 24, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Aaron Crickenberger +* **Note Taker:** Brandon +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/PbLQhLP9F_4](https://youtu.be/PbLQhLP9F_4) +* **Attendees:** + * Tim St. Clair, Joe Beda - Heptio + * Aaron Crickenberger, Brian Grant - Google + * Brandon Philips, Derek Carr, Clayton Coleman, Red Hat + * Dims - Huawei +* **Topics:** + * Going through the board + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * SIG Lifecycle + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2029](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2029) + * Needs to be a lifecycle only doc + * AI Aaron: Move the SIG role stuff into the other governance doc + * Sub projects + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/36](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/36) + * Brian Grant: we need to have fewer OWNERs files + * Aaron: we could build some automation around the OWNERs file and building READMEs for them + * AI Aaron: Will send out some next steps off the call to steering + * Charters + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31) + * Notifying various SIGs + * Has anyone notified SIGs big data, SIG windows + * Brian Grant SIG Big Data should probably be a working group + * AI Brendan Burns: Ping SIG Windows + * AI Brendan Burns: Poke SIG Azure + * AI Joe: Ping SIG AWS [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2733](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2733) + * AI Aaron: Ping SIG pm + * AI Dims: Chase down SIG Cloudprovider and SIG OpenStack merging + * DCO v. CLA + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/74](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/74) + * Brian Grant: there is some disagreement on the tradeoffs of upfront complexity vs ongoing complexity + * Discussion around occasional contributors + * Punting this discussion to another time + * AI Dims: understand how many PRs are blocked on CLA signing + * Sig cloud and parentless work around provider. + * Discussion around carrots and sticks + * Brian Grant: SIG Architecture should be the place to have the next escalation + * AI Dims: SIG Architecture meeting discussion on KEP for OpenStack extraction + * Removal of out of date OWNERS + * Dims trying to identify who is and isn’t active today + * Aaron probably this should be part of SIG Contrib Exp putting a policy in place + * Brian Grant we created the contrib ladder to help with this but we never worked to ensure people are pulling people up the ladder. It wasn’t well socialized to owners and approvers. + * Joe Beda is underfunded as far as tooling is concerned, do we need to involve the CNCF + * Dims should feel empowered to go get funding from CNCF to make this tooling :) + * AI Dims: Take this to Contrib Exp? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2830](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2830) - wg-k8s-infra majority vote needed to proceed + * Discussion around whether it should be a SIG or a working group + * Aaron pointed out that it is unclear whether this needs to be long lived vs getting SIGs to take ownership of things they rely on. E.g. GCP stuff primiarly SIG Release + * AI Dims/Aaron Review the Infra WG PR and see if we can make it feel less SIG like + * Do we need something separate governance of important secrets? + +## Oct 10, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** +* **Note Taker:** Sarah Novotny +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/mdbJs_ApdoU](https://youtu.be/mdbJs_ApdoU) +* **Attendees:** + * Derek Carr, Clayton Coleman - Red Hat + * Tim St. Clair - Heptio + * Sarah Novotny - Google + * Brendan Burns, Michelle Noorali - Microsoft + * Dims - Huawei +* **Topics:** + * Election has ended. Are there next steps for the steering committee? + * Issues filed to be added to the project board. + * Subgroup to address feedback + * Those who didn’t join today are that subgroup. + * Ask Jaice to add the new issues to the project board. + * https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/81 + * Do analysis of voter turnout (compare to devstats threshold?) + * Mapping for Github email ID? + * Need a goal for turnout in elections -- want to be sure we are thought of as the legit leaders. Does this election represent this? + * How do we onboard new members? (michelle) + * Michelle is doing this right now with Dims. + * We should have a more formal process. + * Introduction at first meeting + * Add to all the mailing lists + * Mentor + * Process for onboarding needs plan for next election. More people who will leave the committee with fewer joining. + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * Blocked election issue -- not blocked + * SIG/WG sunset -- AI Michelle to ping Paris/Jorge + * WG creation -- AI Brendan to revisit. + * Steering Committee Liason + * Meta problem with charters not in place. + * AI Aaron to look at issue + * Carrot vs stick convo re: charter + * Dims suggest that we don’t serve (i.e. create new repo etc) SIGs who don’t have charters. + * Freezing zoom account? + * Blocking merge privileges? + * We need to do this. . but, the penalty is rational -- and, need to manage enforcement. + * Reach out to each SIG. before a heavy hand. + * Tie to a release cadence. + * GA a feature without a SIG charter? + * Add to milestone? + * EVERYONE -- go through [the spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1i_8oM1KlmXo90zIIgNTdOg-M6xesTggFLnTkgmscMlI/edit#gid=0) by EOW. and nag/facilitate charters. + * Contributing.md + * New Issue -- DCO vs CLA -- try to bring Max Sills to meeting 10/24. Find a CNCF lawyer… get presentations on positions pros/cons. + * [Discussion in Apache](https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201810.mbox/browser) + * In person meeting in December -- Steering committee at Kubecon + * Dinner Thursday + * Friday meeting. + +## Sep 26, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Michelle Noorali +* **Note Taker:** Brandon +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/OgaZZytEphs](https://youtu.be/OgaZZytEphs) +* **Attendees:** + * Aaron Crickenberger - Google + * Brandon Philips - red hat + * Michelle, Brendan - Microsoft + * Philip, Brian - Google + * Joe, Tim - Heptio + * Quinton - Huawei +* **Topics:** + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2715](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2715) - what do we call the effort to move k8s-infra to CNCF? + * CoCC Knowledge Transfer Session happening Monday. Anyone from Steering Committee who wants to join can contact Michelle for an invite. + * [Documentation requirement](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/53) + * AI: Michelle will follow up with Jaice to see if steering backup is needed and let them know about their authority + * Brian Grant context: whenever someone in the project puts a gate on changes there is often push back from the community where people walk around the gate, reject the gate, or otherwise ignore it + * Quinton: hopefully we can delegate to SIG docs + * Brian Grant: yes, that is the idea + * Aaron: it would be helpful to have links about what policies SIG docs is trying to implement + * Part of the problem is that repetition is needed to ensure everyone is even aware of the policies + * Aaron: part of this should probably be ensuring that all SIGs have a Liason from the steering committee. But, we are still sort of blocked on this until after the elections. + * [Elections](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/63) + * They are in progress + * AI: Aaron see if swapping meet contributors timing to after the elections is possible with Paris + * AI: Quinton talk with Jorge and Paris to ensure we are getting a reasonable number of votes + * The steering commitee will make the announcement, election commitee can prepare a draft + * AI: Aaron figure out how to ensure steering committee members running don’t see detailed election results + * [Document working group formations](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/27) + * BB [walking through his comments](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2702) + * BG: I feel like many things that are working groups should be subprojects + * BB: mostly concerned about endorsement of SIGs + * Discussion around code getting merged into Kubernetes via SIG ownership vs. a working group developing code to prove out an idea concept + * AI: Phil clarify code ownership in Kubernetes v. building code in a working group to prove out an idea to build consensus - add suggest where to put that code (associated repo) + * AI: Phil consider striking the SIG approval lines BB commented on + * Discussion about Infra Team + * Aaron: is it a SIG, Team, Committee, WG, etc + * AI: Aaron propose a new working group to push the infra move forward + +## Sep 12, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Michelle +* **Note Taker:** Tim St. Clair +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/2FyTzm5REUU](https://youtu.be/2FyTzm5REUU) +* **Attendees:** + * Derek, Brendan, Michelle, Aaron, Joe, Clayton, Sarah, Phil, Tim +* **Topics:** + * [AI]: Need to review the CoC charter on a fast track + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * Sunsetting SIGs + * [AI]: Right now we are pending on PR from contribex on policy and procedures for “How” we sunset a SIG. + * Formalize Subprojects + * Still in flight, but still pending on better documentation. + * Nothing is currently blocking + * Working Group Formalization + * [AI:Phil] Still pending on converting doc to markdown to file the PRs. + * [Link](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AlI89KijzO9_KAqUX_pbumgld1LN0tte2FMdjLw83wY/edit) + * [PR Link](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2702) + * SIG Charters + * Edicate + * There are currently a small subset of charters that are pending. + +## August 29, 2018 + +Canceled due to lack of quorum + +## August 15, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Aaron Crickenberger +* **Note Taker:** Brian Grant +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/PhXlFhbwqWg](https://youtu.be/PhXlFhbwqWg) +* **Attendees: ** + * Michelle Noorali + * Aaron Crickenberger, Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant + * Joe Beda + * Quinton Hoole + * Brandon Philips +* **Topics:** + * Private Code of Conduct discussion + * Elections + * Member of standing criteria ([https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2532](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2532)) and other election guide details were merged without SC review. We want to move the authoritative policies to the Steering Committee org. + * Charters + * What to do about areas not actively being pursued by SIGs or that doesn’t fit with K8s current scope + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * [aaron] Chasing after repo ownership and consistent automation + * I’m not sure which steering issue(s) this falls under, more of a heads up + * Would like all managed github orgs to be using our automation + * I’ve been getting pushy on repo/subproject ownership (in sigs.yaml, and with OWNERS files) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/issues/6227](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/issues/6227) - tracks most, but probably missing some (eg: /retest and /lifecycle commenter jobs that run as @fejta-bot) + +## August 1, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Aaron Crickenberger +* **Note Taker:** Brian Grant +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/_jukicl1yK4](https://youtu.be/_jukicl1yK4) +* **Attendees: ** + * Tim St. Clair, Joe Beda - Heptio + * Aaron Crickenberger, Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant - Google + * Derek Carr - Red Hat + * Quinton Hoole - Huawei + * Brendan Burns - Microsoft +* **Topics:** + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * CoCC vote completed. Electees will be notified by Michelle. + * Aim to announce at community meeting next Thursday + * [quinton] Steering committee election is going ahead: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/63](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/63) + * Please object this week if you have any concerns + * Working group documentation: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/27](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/27) + * Brendan will convert doc to a PR + * SC liaiasons: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/64](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/64) + * Underway + * Aaron will solicit folks to staff gaps as identified + * Charters: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31) + * Concerns about owners of subprojects falling under SIGs that don’t attend SIG meetings + * Some SIG should own removing the cluster directory + * Brian will follow up regarding whether anyone is working on this + * We need to move charters forward and get them merged + * SIG Auth and Service Catalog merged + * SIG Node is ready + * Liaisons should attend SIG meetings to discuss + * We need a replacement for Phil on SIG CLI + * We should try to get the charters into mergeable states, and expect to iterate on them + * Checkpoint prior to next week’s community meeting + * We should provide an update at the community meeting next week and emphasize that it will be an iterative process + * Meeting logistical issues + * Office hours + * Non-SC invitees, participants, delegates + * Broader participation would help get more stuff done and grow the next set of leaders + * Concern about potential to influence the direction if just appointed + * We will make a broader call for participation + * The Github Administration proposal should be called out as a good example of how to productively engage -- clear, well bounded, fully formed proposal for approval + +## July 18, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Aaron Crickenberger +* **Note Taker:** Tim St. Clair +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/I6BwkOA9dn4](https://youtu.be/I6BwkOA9dn4) +* **Attendees:** + * Brandon Philips, Derek Carr - Red Hat + * Phillip Wittrock, Aaron Crickenberger - Google + * Joe Beda, Tim St. Clair - Heptio + * Brendan, Michelle - MSFT + * Quinton Hoole - Huawei +* **Topics:** tbd + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * New Contributor Site - pending a vote on creating a repo + * Documentation requirements - should be punted back to docs/arch + * AI: Aaron will ask Jaice to reach out. + * [phillip, derek, tim] - TL;DR on charter template + feedback. + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31) + * Template has been updated and **node & auth** are the canonical examples to reference as we start to give feedback on charters. + * [Michelle] Has also created a separate doc [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/62](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/62) + * How do we evaluate the charter(s). + * Aaron - I’d really like a checklist on evaluation. + * [Aaron] Should we expect iterations in the charters + * [Brian] If we change the scope/leads then steering needs to evaluate + * [Brian] We could version it w/ policy. + * [Michelle] We can just open an issue and adjust. + * [Aaron & Michelle] Sig-cloud-provider and separate providers will need to be treated with care. + * [Quinton] Should we provide a longer term liason per-sig who does periodic reviews. + * [Aaron] AI: Then we should take the spreadsheet and make it more formal. + * [Aaron] How should we proceed + * [Michelle] Deal with the current PRs and loop back and discuss during the next meeting. + * … details on certain “in flight” PRs … + * [Tim] just comment on the PRs, and email if there are issues. + * [Derek] will update the node charter as the better-better example that we should be referencing. + * [Michelle & Brendan ] We should send out an update on the PRs and email(s). + * Document how working groups should be formed, [Jaice’s Doc ](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AlI89KijzO9_KAqUX_pbumgld1LN0tte2FMdjLw83wY/edit) + * [Aaron] what do we need to move this forwards? + * [Brian] look at the proposal, summarize a TL;DR ->PR and get it merged. + * AI: Michelle, Aaron, Joe, and Derek will work on this. + * License Scanning + * [tstclair] Isn’t this sig-release’s ownership? + * [Brian] This overlaps with testing and… + * [Michelle] Code of Conduct + * Opened a PR which contains a [outline](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2384) on committee bootstrapping, etc. + * Deadline to vote is tomorrow. + * Please **GO VOTE** so the committee can be formed. + * There is still a lot of work todo on policies, there should be PRs coming. + * There are more candidates that came in and there are some issues currently with any one company monopolizing the committee. + * [Quinton] We should start putting together the vote details. + * [Aaron] AI: please log an issue with the details. + +## June 20, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Tim St. Clair +* **Note Taker:** Joe Beda +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/UKJYy9Oiuv0](https://youtu.be/UKJYy9Oiuv0) +* **Attendees:** + * Tim, Joe - Heptio + * Phil, Tim, Sarah - Google + * Derek, Clayton- Red Hat +* **Topics: ** + * Getting things done as a steering committee + * Joe -- need to find ways to get things done async + * Tim -- we had a sprint thing with a backlog. Jaice was going to help groom that but it seems to have stalled. + * Sarah -- Example: I haven’t had time to get the steering committee office hours. + * [TimSt] Charter review backlog and state. + * [TimSt] We were going to find commonality and update the template. Has anyone reviewed these? + * [TimH] I’ve read several charters but haven’t found commonality. + * [Derek] Last time didn’t we decide to start with 3? Perhaps do that next meeting? Node can be one + * [TimSt] Start with small group together? (yes) Who wants to sign up: TimH, Phil, Derek, TimS + * By next meeting come armed with results/action items around commonality and modifications to template. + * Phil is going to schedule and send out charters to review. + * Then divvy out backlog of outstanding charters. + * [TimSt] Documentation and helping define overall guidelines and policies + * TimSt has done a lot of work around sig-docs this cycle. Lots of stale docs. Docs folks don’t know what to do with them. Lead to confusion. + * Owners and feature policy (project wide) + * There is a lot of rot and no one owns some of them (Cloud-provider) + * Alpha features need to have policy. + * Who do docs folks poke if there is stuff that is out of lifecycle. + * [Joe] I’m okay with stuff without owners being dropped and moved to an “attic” someplace. + * [Sarah] This should be delegated to SIG-Docs + * 2 goals: + * Write and update docs + * Kick out docs that are unmaintained + * What are the sticks? + * Remove docs for things that aren’t maintained + * Is this part of the charter? Is the chair on the hook? + * Don’t let things go in without docs + * [TimH] the fact we allow code checkins without docs is a problem. Put docs folks in the loop without a PR? + * [Joe] Perhaps gate docs on promotion of APIs to beta and feature gates. + * [Derek] Who are the docs folks? Are there these people? + * [TimH] Perhaps let Docs inject into the process + * [Phil] Perhaps the KEP is the right place to have this happen. + * [TimSt] Sometimes code drifts after KEP. That may be too early. + * [TimH] Just APIs? [TimSt] Feature gates? + * [Phil] What level of docs? What is the quality bar? Reference vs. tutorial vs task? + * [TimH] Have SIG-docs define the rubrick -- but they may not have bandwidth. + * [TimH] Push SIG-docs to give us a proposal. + * [TimH] What can we do to make sure docs don’t rot? + * TimSt: part of the charter? + * TimH: won’t force people + * Phil: Get a signal. Dashboard? Based on every doc they own. + * TimSt: part of release process w/ automation. Just poking the chairs would go a long way + * Phil: clearly defined ownership? + * TimSt: they are looking for an owning sig and a release owner? + * TimH: are they expected to review every doc every cycle? + * TimSt: that is what commercial projects do. + * Phil: we need to get a place where owners can’t hold up a release. + * Joe: What about ownership for docs -- how do we know what docs are owned by which SIG? + * Joe: Volunteer army -- what sticks do we have? + * TimH: We have the power to say no to PRs. Example: Docker has docs folks sign off on every PR. + * 4 options: + * KEP time + * Every check in + * API and feature gate promotion + * At release time + * Derek: can we deputize people inside SIGs to act on behalf of SIG-docs to call if docs are required or not? + * TimSt: responsibility of chair? + * TimH: people are lazy. Could happen now. But not in your face so gets forgotten (I’m guilty too). Maybe not every PR -- perhaps only things that hit APIs/feature gates/flags/configs? + * Derek: perhaps a conscious action to say docs not required. How happy are with release notes? + * Joe: better than nothing? + * TimSt: problem where people don’t respond when pulling in release notes. + * Phil: wouldn’t cost us much to put in another label and a docs LGTM. Even if that LGTM doesn’t required. + * TimSt: Something along the lines of release notes required. + * TimH: we need a cultural change that you can promise to do docs next week + * TimH: fan of release note like process + * Phil: we need guidance and motivation + * TimSt: I do like automation. Key reviewers will see it. + * TimH: different types of LGTMs around code, docs, relnote + * TimH: Docker doesn’t even look at code until docs are written + * Joe: perhaps a generic set of LGTMs that need more over time + * Action: TimSt -- point docs folks at this recording. TimH says “they are empowered to ask for more.” + * [Quinton] Steering committee elections: + * Milestones (working backwards): + * Election results announced - early Oct 2018? (‘t’) + * Open for votes - t-2 weeks? + * Announce who may vote (and allow exception applications) - t-4 weeks? + * Candidate bio distribution deadline - t-4 weeks? + * Candidate solicitation - t-6 weeks? + * Sounds like we need to kickstart the process ~early Aug (t-8 weeks). + +## June 6, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Joe Beda +* **Note Taker:** Joe Beda +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/peqx1GWW7qQ](https://youtu.be/peqx1GWW7qQ) +* **Attendees:** + * Joe, Tim - Heptio + * Brendan Burns - Microsoft + * Sarah, Tim, Brian, Phil - Google + * Clayton - Red Hat +* **Topics:** + * CoCC nominations + * Sarah -- wait for end date. Nominations: 4-5 people -- may be enough. Don’t need to be too big a committee with clear leader. + * How open are nominations? + * Keep it scoped wrt membership + * Hand pick from SC + * What about sharing nomination form more widely? + * Charters + * What is the plan now? + * Look at samples -- make sure template is working. Make a round of feedback, update template, go wider. + * Have we delegated to reviewers to make the call. + * New SIGs being proposed -- discussions on if/how and the charter. Specifically SIG-CloudProvider + * Some folks are unsure about losing the status as sig lead/chair. + * Separable issue: Approval for new SIGs? SIG-SDK/PDK…? + * Lots of technical discussions but we decided we didn’t have the right people in the room and pulled back. + * Steering committee office hour… + * We need to be clear about what powers are dedicated to SIG-Architecture (etc). Need a list of explicit delegations. + * Brian: that will end up in SIG charters + * Tim/Brendan: is that sufficient? We should be explicit vs. having stuff enumerated with charter. + * Brian: Agree + * QQ on release cadence of subprojects + * SIG-architecture owns policy on when and who releases and where they live. + * SIG-release owns the mechanics of how and where we host/sign. + * SIG-release is underfunded to take on some of this. But perhaps we can motivate this. + * CoreDNS and third party components + * Quick update -- don’t fork into our space. Took their container images (to docker hub) and mirror into our GCR buckets. Checksums are the same. + +## May 23, 2018 + +* **Bosun: Michelle Noorali** +* **Note Taker: Tim St. Clair** +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/pMaRzcRI9HU](https://youtu.be/pMaRzcRI9HU) +* **Attendees:** + * Derek, Clayton - Red Hat + * Tim, Joe - Heptio + * Michelle, Brendan - MSFT + * Brian, Sarah, Phil - Google + * Quinton - Huawei +* **Topics** + * Code of Conduct Committee + * Please nominate someone for the Code of Conduct Committee using the form sent to you on steering-private + * Jaice has been working on docs and has outlined some details on “abuse of power”. + * Q/A/Notes + * Q: Can steering committee members be on the Code of Conduct Committee + * A: Not a requirement, but: + * may want an upper bound, + * or possibly an advisory position + * … still not fully defined + * Note: We should nominate Jaice + * Q: There are some questions about organizational vs. contributor violation + * A: The violations for leads is an individual contributor + * Note: Follow ups should refer back to the documents. + * Note: Folks would like more specific examples where possible. + * Q: Do we agree with the framework that Michelle has started in the creation of the CoCC and should we proceed? + * A: YES! But we would like it to remain Kubernetes specific, and may need to revisit some of the logistics. Please see (TODO:link) + * Note: Contention on escalation towards CNCF, and division of responsibilities. + * Note: It may be beneficial for the CoCC to publish stats. + * Note: Keeping a historical record would be beneficial with an option on whether to purge or not purge. Folks will review other communities to try and get a larger understanding of the policy space that exists. The goal is create a workable, transparent, system. + * Note: Decisions should be binding and final. + * ~ 3:40 Brian: The steering committee may need a “office-hours” option. Sarah is volunteering to send out an invite. + * Tim: Do we have a process for retiring projects? If there is no activity or no maintainers, there exists a kubernetes-retired org. + * We can send an email to the list w/timeout prior to moving. + * AI: Brendan will PR the original + * Tim: What about repos being transferred into kubernetes-sigs, are there any CLA constraints. + * There should not be, but folks can discuss with CNCF Legal. + * Michelle: Our backlog needs some grooming, state = ? + * Part of that was moving to github projects, + * Jaice offered to move those items over and Michelle will help organize them. + * AI: Michelle will sync with Jaice about having the backlog in order for us to work on regularly. + * Michelle: Follow up on reviewing charters + * Brian has started on a number of the charters and may be updating the main charter(s). + * Derek: Do we have a policy on sub-projects having their own slack channels and mailing lists + * Brian: That’s fine, that should not be a blocking issue. + * Joe: As we look to fold sigs in, we may want to have more custom structures. + * AI (everyone) : Review existing charter PRs. + * AI: Michelle will follow up on how we should review those charters. + +## May 9, 2018 + +* **Bosun: ** Joe Beda +* **Note Taker: **Aaron Crickenberger +* **Video: **[https://youtu.be/xtg3sWWRf4c](https://youtu.be/xtg3sWWRf4c) +* **Attendees:** + * Tim, Joe - Heptio + * Brian, Tim, Phil - Google + * Michelle, Brendan - MSFT + * Clayton - RHAT + * Aaron - Samsung SDS +* **Topics** + * Upcoming CNCF governance board meeting items [Michelle] + * There is a licensing whitelist/blacklist proposal. Will send out slides. + * That got voted on + * The CNCF has to approve all licenses for projects in the CNCF as well as their dependencies (ie: compliance of all licenses, blanket approval via an allow / disallow list) + * Yay all around, no objections and that got passed + * Isn’t to say if you’re not on whitelist you’re not approved, you just have to go through a process + * They run projects through (fossoligy?) on a per-request basis rather than continually + * [brian] sig testing folks are working on automating the license verification + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/62088](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/62088) PR from rmmh + * Thockin will take a look at this PR + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/44505](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/44505) contribex issue + * Maybe this actually going through contributor experience? + * Automating it turns out to be hard? + * We also have a bunch of third party code that doesn’t necessarily import licnese files + * There is an [issue filed on steering](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/21) with the list of things that are believed not to meet requirements + * This seems like a CNCF-wide thing not a kubernetes/kubernetes thing + * Is this a thing we can ask the CNCF to take for its projects? + * Make following CNCF licensing guidelines requirement to become part of the project? + * [Aaron] This is something I think belongs with contribex and we could have them raise in visibility, I haven’t heard about it lately. Will raise in priority with contribex + * [Aaron] This was something that was talked about at LF OSLS repeatedly, hope we’re not reinventing the wheel here? Might be worth reaching out to some of the folks who presented on their efforts + * [Michelle] going forward is this sort of stuff something I could send on to the steering committee? This was an example of cherry picking something I knew might be relevant to our interests + * [Michelle] Will sending out the relevant information and start sending out summaries + * “The marking stuff is a huge step forward from last year” brian + * [Michelle] Will double check with CNCF if they have any automated compliance checking tools + * [in chat] - Quinton provided this link [https://compliance.linuxfoundation.org/references/tools](https://compliance.linuxfoundation.org/references/tools) + * [Various governance clarifications](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1994) PR + * [tim+phil] imo we need a process doc, there appears to be a fair amount of confusion, e.g. - governance<>charter is lost in translation. + * Questions/comments/concerns for the process re: filing their charter + * We need to start evangelizing and making clear what the expectations are and how the process should work + * [joe] We need to close this amongst ourselves before getting it through + * [brian] We had discussed using other sample charters to cherry pick what good examples are to come up with the ideal charter. Put effort into sig arch, sig apps, sig scalability. + * Contributor experience already merged theirs + * [joe] Questions around the meta process + * [Aaron] suggest we go to steering-private, use the existing charter drafts submitted as examples + * Send things that work things that don’t through mailing list + * Close loop on consensus by next meeting + * Strawmen of meta process to be discussed by next + * Answer: what constitutes a charter, how do we close on it, and then what is the process we broadcast to the community + * [Aaron] Will assign people based on specific sig charters + * [Michelle] will handle drafting meta process, brendan will act as reviewer, call last call for yay/nay at next meeting + * [tim, quinton, joe] Voting rights proposal + * Went back and forth on a couple of idea + * Original simplest idea: just use devstas + * Can roll up devstas across repos for github events etc + * Draw a cut bar line across that + * There will be some potential bad actors within that whole state space + * But on average the signal to noise ratio is higher there + * About on the order of 600 people + * Separates this from the idea of sig membership + * Is there room for “hey I’m not on the list but I think I should be” + * [quinton] get a SIG to sponsor you + * Is there room for blacklist people who are gaming the system + * Specifics: All events, threshold of 100 + * So yeah you can emoji your way into voting + * Quinton will take on calling last call + * [tim] CNCF conformance group + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/62912](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/62912) and conversation on sig-testing shows that they are free running with no proper feedback loop. The goal was to have them work with sig-arch 1st. + * The steering committee had OK’ed that we would hire a bunch of folks + * But what was not clear was the mandate by which they were given to execute + * What happened was prviate communication between Dan Kohn and folks at Google, unclear how they were executing + * Bunch of random PR’s showed up to sig testing + * The handoff of expectations was clearly not articulated + * We as a group were OK with it, but there appeared to be a drop in handoff + * The point of order here is about process or the lack thereof + * … (I missed a bunch because I was talking - ed) ... + * The leadup was clean but then I don’t know what happened once we had the money + * That request for money, should that be talked about in the relevant sigs as well? Or should it be talked about after the money is allocated? + * As long as there’s a plan + * In this specific case, Brian will chase down Mithra to see what’s going on, and convey some of the things around process that we discussed here + * Do we want to require any sort of checkpointing? How formal of a process should we get here? + * [Aaron] Seems like long term yes? But not needed today? We reached more of a consensus + * We really don’t want to be in the business of PM’ing these sorts of things, the idea is to have a SIG run it + * [michelle] Code of Conduct Committee doc + +## April 25, 2018 + +* **Bosun: ** +* **Note Taker: ** +* **Video: **n/a +* **Attendees:** +* **Topics** + * Skipped due to lack of critical mass + +## April 11, 2018 + +* **Bosun: **Aaron Crickenberger +* **Note Taker: **Michelle Noorali +* **Video: **[https://youtu.be/EcSQ4BF4LO4](https://youtu.be/EcSQ4BF4LO4) +* **Attendees:** + * Aaron Crickenberger, Samsung SDS + * Sarah Novotny, Google + * Brian Grant, Google + * Michelle Noorali, Microsoft + * Quinton Hoole, Huawei + * Tim St Clair, Heptio + * Derek Carr, Redhat + * Tim Hockin, Google + * First Last, Company +* **Topics** + * Follow Up - charter approvals [aaron] + * Tracking [spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1i_8oM1KlmXo90zIIgNTdOg-M6xesTggFLnTkgmscMlI/edit) - missing sig-ui, and some secondaries + * Keep using spreadsheet to track progress, columns for discussed, drafted, done + * What deadlines do we want to impose? Anything pre-kubecon eu? + * Conversation around how much scope a SIG should define in their charter + * Brian: would be useful to define scope which would inform new sub projects being in or out of scope + * Derek: Is there a charter we should model against? One of the tensions seen is finding boundary of scope is tough. In SIG Node, it’s enumerated as a set of goals + * Tim S (in chat): goals and non-goals = scope + * Brian: [SIG Architecture charter](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/sig-architecture/charter.md) as example charter with definition of scope + * Chicken and egg problem. Should we iterate with a few SIGs and then show as shining example to the rest? + * Brian disagrees here. Iterate as we go. + * Tim: Should we put a timebox to create a charter? + * Derek: Codifying process of a long standing SIG without outside effort as a first pass is useful. + * Aaron: Let’s iterate on the charters that currently exist (including PRs) and come back to next steering committee meeting with feedback on those. + * **AI: Making a commitment to push forward on the 6 charters that are in now and let’s come back to the table next meeting with what we like and don’t like ** + * Follow Up - project membership / contributor ladder replacement proposal + * Have we progressed on this since last meeting? + * 3 proposals are in and now we need to re-sync on those. + * Sarah, Michelle, Aaron still interested in helping out here. + * The current proposal represents a wide spectrum. + * Discussion around what the constraints have been in the past for voting and running for steering committee. + * Derek: The bar for voting / membership is higher than the one running for steering committee. Maybe there should be some minimum bar for both. + * Quinton: How do we subvert hostile actors + * Derek: Let’s control the probability of bad actors by also limiting nominees + * Tim: Let’s limit the bar for one or the other (nominees or voters) and voting can be taken advantage of by popular folks on Twitter + * Quinton: There are rules in place around how much of steering committee is changed at a time + * Asks from sig-contributor-experience + * Have mostly de-SPOF’ed, want to use a mailing list to handle requests for administriva such as sig creation, sig sunsetting + * In lieu of a help desk + * [community@kubernetes.io](mailto:community@kubernetes.io)? [kubernetes-community-admins@googlegroups.com](mailto:kubernetes-community-admins@googlegroups.com)? + * Tim: may have ability to create [community@kubernetes.io](mailto:community@kubernetes.io) + * **AI: Tim volunteers as tribute** + * **Tim needs a list of people to add as owners on the list to add before removing himself.** + * Are we setting precedent for others groups? + * Gsuite accounts have features that public groups do not. + * Audit logs are an example of a useful feature in some cases + * Nesting mailing lists is another example + * [Need docs on why / how to dissolve / convert sigs and wg’s](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2029https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2029), can steering committee help with the “why”? + * [onprem converting to a wg](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2030) + * [cluster-ops moving to a wg or subproject of cluster-lifecycle?](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2031) + * Governance + * [sigs, wgs, committees… bofs?](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/o4u0SvPUyyU) + * Confusion in past about SIGs, WGs + * Example: SIG Big-data, resurrected + * There is a proliferation of use cases for Kubernetes and different groups of people wanted working groups. + * Aaron: How many working groups have gone away? + * Brian enumerates examples + * Brian: WGs should have concrete outputs + * There are certain kinds of working groups that are coming about + * Use cases and personas are helpful output from working groups + * We need more structure around working group cases + * There needs to be some kind of process around creating a working group + * BoF concept proposal. Let’s have a standard way that we let people know that conversations are happening + * Useful to help people connect and coordinate + * SIG Apps + developer WG conversation as example + * SIG cluster lifecycle - some conversations happening there around subprojects. We push binaries in random places + * Aaron: Everyone wants discoverability. Steering committee doesn’t want to endorse. Push everything as a sub project under a SIG to create some sense of heirarachy + * **AI: Brian will give a tour of sub projects** + * **AI: Brian, Michelle will talk about putting some structure around WG** + * Quinton: maybe we’re over complicating + * Brian: Norms should be documented + * Let’s continue to discuss this on the mailing list + * Kubernetes- mailing list infringes on the trademark. We + * [Various governance clarifications](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1994) PR + +## March 28, 2018 + +* **Bosun: **Joe Beda +* **Note Taker: **Aaron Crickenberger +* **Video: **[https://youtu.be/7yfKRJ59WUA](https://youtu.be/7yfKRJ59WUA) +* **Attendees:** + * Aaron Crickenberger, Samsung SDS + * Joe Beda, Heptio + * Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Philip Wittrock, Google + * Clayton Coleman, Red Hat + * Quinton Hoole, Huawei + * Brendan Burns + * Michelle Noorali, Microsoft +* **Topics** + * Followup from previous meetings + * Charter approvals? + * Have a [spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1i_8oM1KlmXo90zIIgNTdOg-M6xesTggFLnTkgmscMlI/edit) + * Err on the side of having someone with familiarity of the sig + * Look at: scope, deviation from template + * Do we have anything like a deadline at the moment? + * Going around to sigs individually to explain what’s going on + * Some sigs still don’t understand subprojects, they’re doing working groups instead of subprojects + * Eg: sig cluster lifecycle didn’t look at governance or charter, a lot of this was news to them + * Suggestion: why don’t we use the spreadsheet to sign up for outreach / Q & A + * A number of sigs have created repos in kubernetes-sigs, not all of those sigs met requirements for being able to do that + * Eg: they have to identify their subprojects, some of them didn’t do that and they got repos + * So make sure we hold the line + * Idea: have like a primary ambassador per sig? Monthly or quarterly? + * Suggestion: contributor experience is already going around to SIGs on a quarterly basis, the more we keep them in the loop regarding governance decisions, the less legwork we would have to do to communicate that + * AI: take the spreadhseet, and make sure the steering committee is signing up for at least X of these sigs (Aaron will be whip for this) + * Project membership / contributor ladder replacement proposal? (Joe, Quinton, Tim) + * Have had good discussions in terms of what we think is acceptable or not + * What matters most: who and how will we determine how we do voting in the next steering committee election + * Tensions between delegating voter roles to sigs so they can define things but also trying to make sure companies/sigs can’t game the system + * One proposal paraphrased: + * Say that it’s more like a representative democracy, where people inside of a sig vote for members, who in the sig gets to represent that sig, and then those members get to vote who’s in the steering committee + * There may be sigs who are too populated by a vendor in leadership or membership + * There are some sigs that ineffective + * Rough notes: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PtNDBBdkDCyNXVau9v4oWGgBGgdFfL6IAtWuhM_HNzY/edit#heading=h.vlo3cwkmsazx](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PtNDBBdkDCyNXVau9v4oWGgBGgdFfL6IAtWuhM_HNzY/edit#heading=h.vlo3cwkmsazx) + * How to reconcile the democratic aspects with the demonstrated contribution model? + * Alternate proposal + * Let sigs maintain a list of roles / membership types + * Those sigs have their own criteria for those things + * Some number of months before the election we could take a snapshot of all the members, and review in that context the number of people in any given role for that sig, and determine whether that group is qualifying or non-qualifying + * Eg: whole bunch of people who are chart maintainers, should being a chart maintainer qualify you for voting for steering committee + * Will a sig try to pack members or game the system + * Not just malicious intent: if each sig doesn’t get guidance on how many votes to dish out, they may weight inappropriately + * If you’re a member of multiple sigs, do you get multiple votes? + * We never intended for it to be sig representation, prove that you have skin in the game + * But to be fair all this was done before the elections + * Bburns: I don’t think we necessarily want proportional representation + * Fairly happy with one person one vote, but if you had one person who made very large contributions in multiple sigs should they count for more, and I think the answer is they shouldn’t + * Steering committee is beholding to the community not the sigs + * Eg: we have cloud specific sigs, and we find that the leads there tend to be dominated by one company and then they add a ton of members, the value they add are disproportionate for that company + * How much of this do we need to work out in advance vs. attempting to correct for obvious abuse? + * Maybe we apply the same representation to guidelines to the voting population that we do to a given company? + * But then how we decide that a given company is oversubscribed? + * Do we need to cap votes or is capping representation on the committee enough? + * We’ll keep noodling on this, appreciate more feedback on the doc or people to join the group and participate + * AI: Sarah & Aaron interested if it doesn’t conflict (don’t need to move to accommodate), Michelle interested + * KubeCon EU F2F or other F2F? + * We already have a lot of meetings during kubecon and doing f2f things + * Maybe it would be better to spend that time speaking with others + * Sounds like no strong desire to have Yet Another Meeting + * Option Fun Social Event Including Trustfalls And Molecular Gastronomy? + * Values PR [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/25](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/25) (Sarah) + * Go +1 sarah’s PR + * Deprecating incubator, spelling out repository process (Aaron) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1922](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1922) + * Down payment from Phil: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1979](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1979) + * LGTM’d (sarah) + * Subprojects (Aaron) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1673](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1673) + * Need to see what progress we’ve made here + * How are we doing on communication + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/abeab354ca37f73453779921130364c20f3a5cfe/governance.md#subprojects](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/abeab354ca37f73453779921130364c20f3a5cfe/governance.md#subprojects) + * Next steps? + * Label repos with topics based on subprojects? + * Chase after repos that lack OWNERS? [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1721](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1721) + * Add sig/owners fields to OWNERS files? + * Feeling like we need to make them feel more like a thing? + * Find orphaned code that nobody claims ownership of and delete it, see who yells? + * We need the next level of tooling + * Right now sigs.yaml creates readmes + * Do we create subdirectories for each subproject instead of a bulleted list? + * Sounds like we may as well try it + * Code of Conduct Committee… TBD + * Definition of a Working Group is rather thing, maybe this is something we should hash out + * Need in writing what the difference is between sig/wg/committee + * AI: Joe is signing up to do this, Michelle raised the issue + +## March 14, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** +* **Note Taker:** Joe Beda +* **Video: **[https://youtu.be/Pp3gQw-iIAI](https://youtu.be/Pp3gQw-iIAI) +* **Attendees:** + * Joe Beda - Heptio + * Quinton Hoole - Huawei + * Brandon Phillips - CoreOS/Redhat + * Brian Grant - Google + * Phillip Wittrock - Google + * Tim St Clair - Heptio + * Brendan Burns - Microsoft + * Sarah Novotny - Google + * Michelle Noorali - Microsoft +* **Topics** + * Repo naming for kubernetes-sigs + * Came up in a bunch of threads. Started with a sig name prefix to make association clear and for metric automation and such. + * ~6 examples now + * people don’t like the pattern: + * too verbose. + * What happens as SIGs mutate over time + * Abbreviate over time + * Dashes or underscores + * Examples of topics: [https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs](https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs) + * API: [https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/#list-all-topics-for-a-repository](https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/#list-all-topics-for-a-repository) + * General support -- approved + * Charter approval requirements + * What is the process? + * Brian: need to have steering committee play a role for 2 reasons: + * Keep consistent and well formed -- all new so we need to establish patterns + * Spell out how scope -- need to validate that and approve + * We need to be responsive -- SLO? + * Load balancing responsibility? + * For first chunk -- [create spreadsheet with owners?](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1i_8oM1KlmXo90zIIgNTdOg-M6xesTggFLnTkgmscMlI/edit?usp=sharing) + * Need to define OARP + * O: sig has to drive it themselves + * A: SIG asks steering@ for an approver + * R: SIG members + rest of the steering + * P: Community at large + * Project Membership tracking + * Brian proposal (joe would have said the same thing): + * SIGs should identify additional roles (beyond coding) + * Put these in OWNERS files (or if no place else, then contributors or sigs.yaml) + * These should only be people with “skin in the game” + * Also a place to do job postings and such + * Project voting/”membership” is the transitive closure of all SIG/committee roles + * Questions: + * Does project voting == has a role? + * What about people that write a lot of code but don’t have a formal role + * Make them be reviewers? + * Some people are sponsored by companies and don’t have bandwidth to do reviews + * Automation precludes new people from doing reviews? How do people dip their toe in. + * Perhaps this is a corner case. + * Need to find a way to bring them into the org and have move impact. + * Need to write this down. Show how you can demonstrate skin in the game. + * Tragedy of the commons without common roles + * Is there a “prolific coder” role + * Samples of what is “above the bar?” + * Are all SIGs equal? Senate vs house? Some SIGs will have more members and have more influence. + * We should curate SIGs at charter level + * Members are members -- no senate. + * Renewal/expiration? + * SIG stacking? + * AI: smaller group of people put together a proposal for how this works + * This will replace/augment the contributor ladder + * Joe, Quinton, Tim + * Licensing standards for dependencies + * CNCF is looking at tools for continuous monitoring + * Push back on CNCF that requirements need to come with automation + * Tim Hockin has been driving most of the cleanup + * Not everyone understands all the rules -- nested dependencies + * AI: Brian remembers what he has already chased down? + * AI: Brian to give feedback to CNCF about license tools again + * AI: Michelle/Brandon give feedback to CNCF GB about license requirements and needing tooling + * F2F KubeCon EU and Agenda? [Tim] + * Is there critical mass? + * Brendan may not be there + * Use mailing list to see who is going. + * Even partial group is worthwhile + * Counterpoint -- use time to meet with folks that we don’t meet regularly + * Some non-conf f2f? Might be valuable in lieu of or in addition to kubecon f2f. + * Code of Conduct Committee [Michelle] + * Asked around at OSLS -- not super common + * What’s the point? What do we want to get out of it? + * CNCF wide CoC vs. just k8s? + * Can put more resources into it -- CNCF lawyer + * Learn across projects + * Brian: need to rewrite CoC regardless. Events in the past makes the CoC less than ideal. Will have to break new ground. + * LF doesn’t have a great track record + * Also increases likelihood that we are held accountable + * Joint committee would be less familiar with our norms/players + * Brendan -- on board -- no huge concerns + * Quinton: seems difficult to get right in the first pass. Hesitant to be too general until we have success at smaller scope. May be sensible to start with k8s only and grow. + * AI: move discussion to steering-private + +## February 28, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** +* **Note Taker:** Philips +* **Video: **[https://youtu.be/bWXVBsyRppg](https://youtu.be/bWXVBsyRppg) +* **Attendees (10/13):** + * Michelle Noorali - Microsoft + * Tim St. Clair - Heptio + * Joe Beda - Heptio + * Brandon Philips - Red Hat + * Derek Carr - Red Hat + * Phillip Wittrock, Brian Grant, Tim Hockin, Sarah Novotny - Google + * Quinton Hoole - Huawei +* **Topics:** + * Review of progress on[ current sprint](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/master/backlog.md#current-sprint-end-of-feb18) / outstanding efforts + * Update project values + * Sarah needs to do a PR about it + * User voice from Chen is interesting, but need to put it onto the next sprint + * Brian Grant said we have to define who our users are + * Multi-tenant, conformance, etc + * Intra-SIG governance / SIG charter template + * Philipp got the [requirements doc merged](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-steering/governance/sig-governance-requirements.md) + * There is a PR out for updating specification for having subprojects define technical requirements as well + * Short template [out for review](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1830) + * What to call the non-technical lead - vote is out + * Timeline for when SIGs should have their charter? + * No. Don’t want to set it up until we’ve tested a few. + * Idea: you can’t sponsor a new project until you have a charter in place + * . + * Repository proposal + * Brendan owns this. Aaron finished setting up automation. + * As far as we know we are ready to go, blocked on SIGs doing homework (see above) / open for business + * Formalize concept of subprojects + * Brian Grant: we took a first stab at categorizing all of the subprojects, added owners files, and updating owners files + * Phil has a PR out to merge owners and maintainers + * Structure: effectively two types of orgs. github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes also known as core; and then subprojects that are in a SIG Github Org + * Any CNCF GB issues Michelle and Brandon need to be aware of? + * Brandon's notes: + * Via Dan Kohn: Approving up to $600 K for improving K8s conformance tests, now that SIG Architecture has implemented a policy of requiring conformance tweets of all stable features, as the GB requested in December. + * $600K spending will be overseen by SIG Architecture + * Approved spending from Steering Committee + * $60-170k Bug bounty + * [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/S71W5sBcdVc](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/S71W5sBcdVc) + * Discussion about the kubernetes security committee: [https://kubernetes.io/security/](https://kubernetes.io/security/) + * + * CNCF graduation + * We passed! + * Next Sprint Teams/Items? +* Actions + * Michelle: Need to explain what subprojects are, announcements at community meeting are not sufficient + * Michelle: README in community repo for subprojects + * Phill: Agree on new Name for SIG Lead + * Phil: Update short template + * If nothing contentious, merge + * If not merged by Friday we won’t block creation of new projects based on lack of SIG charter + * ???: We could get feedback from SIG contribx on experience of writing a charter + * ???: Send email to sig leads mailing list. Phil to write doc framing message + * Michelle: find/send Jago’s proposal to ??? + * Philips: tell Maya that we are going to raise the bug bounty program budget to the CNCF GB + * Philips: rename the product security team to product security committee + +## February 14, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Aaron +* **Note Taker:** Joe Beda +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/bDVFHvq1EmM](https://youtu.be/bDVFHvq1EmM) +* **Attendees:** + * Joe Beda, Tim St. Clair- Heptio + * Phillip Wittrock, Tim Hockin, Brian Grant, Sarah Novotny - Google + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) - Samsung SDS + * Derek Carr - Red Hat + * Michelle Noorali, Brendan Burns - Microsoft +* **Topics:** + * Review of progress on[ current sprint](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/master/backlog.md#current-sprint-end-of-feb18) / outstanding efforts + * Update project values + * Sarah: really close. Need to look for address last comments. + * Tim: I have one PR I want to get in there. Put in something around sustainability. + * Brian: automation over toil plays in. Also continuity is about turning over leadership. + * Sarah: I’ll see if I can put anti-heroism in here some place. + * [Sarah types]. Thumbs up. + * Done! Sarah will get it done. + * Intra-SIG governance/SIG charter template + * Phil: [Churning on PR](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1650), restructured into 4 docs + * Requirements on SIGs + * Brian: Include the scope of the SIG + * Templates are starting places for SIGs (requirements, short, long) + * Things to resolve + * Subprojects -- how to delegate and such + * Name for non TL (Phil thought “SIG Lead” but Joe and Tim aren’t fans). + * Do SIGs need to get charter approval from steering committee? + * Consensus: yes + * Suggested way to track membership + * Why do we need this? When the SIG has to vote on stuff. Also plays into steering committee voting + * Sarah: if we do have this we want to have *some* level of proscriptiveness to minimize politics. + * Decision: Let’s get something out even if there are some TBDs + * [New reduced scope PR](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1800) + * Repository proposal/“Incubator process” (what gaps are left after repository proposal) + * [spiffxp] AFAIK automation is setup + * Brendan -- addressed a lot of comments and about to push up new version with comments addressed. + * What process do we use? Have everyone on committee LGTM? + * Aaron: open questions with implementing this. What about teams? [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1799](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1799) + * Is this an org per SIG or one org? We are starting with single org (kubernetes-sigs) with naming convention. + * We will probably have ~10-50 repos in the first month. + * Need to spell out logistics someplace? Separate out governance vs. logistics. + * Brendan will send a follow PR with process + * Formalize concept of subprojects + * Identify all OWNERS files that don’t exist and pre-populate + * Brian: start asking SIGs/repo owners to do this + * Brian: merge owners and maintainers in ladder + * Need automation to create bi-directional links. + * Perhaps have someone from ContribX build this out + * Discuss items we want to bring up at the next CNCF GB meeting [Michelle] + * Michelle had technical issues and had to drop :( + * $600K for contractors to backfill tests. Contractors have been identified. Clock is ticking. + * Brian has context: Initial conformance test suite has low coverage. Want to up the coverage by writing more tests. Proposals within the conformance efforts to get automated broad coverage. + * CNCF Need steering committee to approve this. Brian hasn’t been happy with the proposals so far. Would go through SIG-Architecture and steering committee would approve. Can’t have this level of funding forever. SIG-Arch will need to have some level of policy around getting to GA perhaps. + * Test framework to have same test run both in unit test and e2e test. + * Next action on SIG-architecture and CNCF conformance WG. + * (Some discussions around the fact that this is a CNCF level WG -- accident of history). + * Discuss communication infra (google groups, groups.io, k8s.io) and tracking SIG membership (email list, OWNERS). What do we expect from sub-projects wrt consistency in this area? [Joe] + * Opt to share docs as public by default so as to avoid excluding folks who can’t login to google (ie: China) + * Joe will work with contribx to explore other options (discourse?) + * Accessibility from china + * Groups/forums that can be driven via API from OWNERS files so we have one source of truth of who is what. We want to have one source of record that is tracked. + * Better discoverability experience — all of the groups in one place vs. having it spread throughout groups. + * Email connections + * We will use OWNERS-ish files for tracking SIG membership. Syncing to mailing lists isn’t possible with current google groups and will be TBD until we have bandwidth to do tooling and make a transition off google groups. + * Code of conduct committee + * [spiffxp] does steering need to be involved in all moderation decisions? sig-contributor-experience is taking these duties on in their charter as part of the community-management subproject + * should steering be listed as point of contact for code of conduct? Currently it’s [Sarah or Dan on the CNCF CoC](https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/master/code-of-conduct.md) + * We need to come up with concrete proposal and CNCF is up to adjusting their CoC. + * [sarahnovotny] [project graduation at CNCF](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/12) + +## January 31, 2018 + +* **Bosun:** Aaron Crickenberger +* **Note Taker:** Phillip Wittrock +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/j8tj13gFYZY](https://youtu.be/j8tj13gFYZY) +* **Attendees:** + * Tim St. Clair, Joe Beda - Heptio + * Aaron Crickenberger - Samsung SDS + * Derek Carr, Clayton Coleman - Red Hat + * Phillip Wittrock, Brian Grant, Tim Hockin, Sarah Novotny - Google +* **Topics:** + * [jbeda] Heads up -- rename from Master to something else? [kubernetes/website#6525](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/6525) + * Already had this conversation before, and made a decision not to change the name + * Master / Worker common in literature to reference + * If we want to make this change, need to figure out the cost of the change + * How much code needs to be changed - maybe not that much, but some? + * SIG Architecture decision + * Probably will continue to come up both inside and outside the community + * [briangrant] Review of progress on [current sprint](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/master/backlog.md#current-sprint-end-of-jan18) / outstanding efforts + * [tstclair] update on [brendans proposal](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yauW9zMtWgXN8xh4q6144B2xBTPuIOLGc0L6aQPMj1I/edit?ts=5a3c8c55)? Community is asking for direction, and I think we owe some formal statement during community meeting. + * Open issue - What is the GA terminology for these? Can SIG projects publish “V1” images? + * What is the feedback and issues from org-structure? + * Multi-org has issue(s), for the time being we’ll create a kubernetes-sigs org. + * Brian’s feedback + * In November we agreed to unblock SIGs that needed repos + * Decouple goals and directional aspect, provide an interim solution, and defer finalizing the details + * Goal to get this out to the community ASAP and allow SIGs to start creating repos + * Stop gap proposals + * Plan to continue to use incubator as a stop gap for SIGs now + * Some concern about doing this + * CLA bot is easy to set up for new orgs + * Create kubernetes-sigs org and SIGs can create repos there + * General agreement to this solution + * Will defer the GA question since it is controversial + * Should have a top levels OWNERs file with the SIG that owns + * SIGs accept through lazy consensus + * Will cut the proposal down and send tomorrow + * [briangrant] Resurrecting the interim SIG repo agreement from Nov 8 (see notes below) + * [sarahnovotny] [Kubernetes Values](https://docs.google.com/document/d/12J0YLKBOfBTMd8ZdPpFMIAhMmGIfapMg-nkYPJYY7FY/edit#) -- several seem concise and uncontested. Two still need some refinement. + * Tightened up some things, reduce content + * Keep it high level and strategic + * <Reviewed during the meeting> + * Tiny wordsmithing left + * [spiffxp] Resolve the disconnect between code organization (OWNERS, maintainers) and people organization + * [Initial implementation](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1674) + * How to roll out subprojects without making people feel voluntold? + * e-mail to kubernetes-dev requesting PR review? + * Merge and e-mail to kubernetes-dev / present at community that this is first pass, list of subprojects isn’t set in stone, feedback appreciated? + * Set a deadline for sigs to finalize their subprojects? + * Set a deadline for brian to get the list of subprojects out of his head? + * Next steps? + * Add sig, subproject fields to OWNERS files (would like brian’s help on scoping this) + * Start using automation to audit: + * Are these OWNERS files even present? + * End goal (next sprint?) is to treat owners files as source of truth rather than k/community + * Merge maintainer into owner role (would like brian to take lead on this) + * Can send email to SIG leads to ask to communicate to relevant people in their SIGs to take a look + * Need to communicate adoption of subprojects + * Why: Aligning code and organization + * Focussing on strawman human readable implementation before starting to shard + * Taking best guess as single repo things - need help with multi repo projects + * Will present about this at the community meeting tomorrow + * Start talking about subprojects in OWNERs files + * Will be updating the membership ladder + * Want to separate ladder from GH roles + * [pwittrock] SIG Governance + * Proposal out for review [here](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1650) + * Need a companion doc with the interface for what SIGs have to fulfill + * Not ready to solicit feedback from community - needs to be reworked + * Want a “checklist” for SIGs to check off, and a reference implementation + * Steering committee involvement should be exception process, not oversight process + * [jbeda] Get an answer to Jorge/Paris on what we’d like to see out of contributor summit. [Email thread.](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!msg/steering/KpEZ8KNtgOY/iuNvQVLwAAAJ) + * [sarahnovotny] [project graduation at CNCF](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/12) + * We will be the first project to graduate + * Will set a precedent for other projects - want to make sure that we meet the criteria + * Size of the project makes it hard to make big changes + * We meet the basic criteria, and other projects are mirroring what we are doing - setting a precedent whether we intend to or not + * No downside to graduating - governance has light touch + * Toc does voting through email - has benefits + * Can be answered asynchronously + * Has permanent record that is less easily changed than through GitHub + * Maybe we should add this process to the charter + * [sarahnovotny] mentoring program feedback. [Email thread](https://groups.google.com/d/msg/kubernetes-wg-contribex/kisf4lrqUG0/MLk8LNePAwAJ) + * [pwittrock] Should we have a weekly update at the community meeting? + * Answer: Let’s do a bi-weekly meeting + * Paris and Jorge requested input in process for contributor summit invites + * Would prefer to get input early instead of afterward + * Speak now or hold your peace + +## January 17, 2018 + +* **Bosun: **bburns +* **Note Taker: **jbeda +* **Video:** [https://youtu.be/PyjUlxxbJ9Y](https://youtu.be/PyjUlxxbJ9Y) +* **Attendees** + * Aaron Crickenberger [Samsung SDS] + * Michelle Noorali [Microsoft] + * Quinton Hoole [Huawei] + * Joe Beda, Tim St. Clair [Heptio] + * Phillip Wittrock [Google] + * Tim Hockin [Google] + * Derek Carr [Red Hat] + * Brian Grant [Google] +* **Topics** + * [spiffxp] [Where are we on our sprint items?](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/master/backlog.md#current-sprint-end-of-jan18) + * Project values + * Brendan and sarah haven’t sync’d so there are no updates. Brendan to follow up. + * Intra SIG governance + * Sent survey to SIG leads + * Long form answers + * Some good takeaways -- big diversity of needs. Some sigs have the structure they needs, some need some guidance. + * Have survey for community - plan to send out tomorrow + * Multiple choice questions -- easier to aggregate + * Started document to outline intended organization structure + provide a charter template that follows the structure - [link](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JU4LLgF2OFQQJyTec-MK5ykVQjY5TzE2WlS5ob-TD6A/edit#) + * Check governance docs into community repo + * [tstclair] PRs are merged or /lgtm’d move to ratify. + * [decarr] PR for changes to charter [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/22](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/22) + * All members of steering committee will `/lgtm` that PR. + * Resolve disconnect between code org and people org + * [Brian’s proposal](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FHauGII5LNVM-dZcNfzYZ-6WRs9RoPctQ4bw5dczrkk/edit#heading=h.aptlokk78hrh) + * Suggest starting with formalizing subprojects + * [Strawman of adding subprojects to sigs](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/compare/master...spiffxp:sig-ownership-strawman) + * Get list of subprojects beyond repos + * Merge [maintainer](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/community-membership.md#maintainer) role into [owner](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/community-membership.md#owner) role + * Discussion: + * Lots of discussion around what this the sub-project proposal is used for + * Worries about too much bureaucracy. + * Goals: Who owns the code in larger sense (SIG), accountability, aligning people structures with code structure. + * Example -- kube-proxy. Subproject of SIG-network. Carving it off enables breaking out into separate repo. + * Questions around what is authoritative -- the stuff in community repo or the references from OWNERS. Need toolability here. Aaron starting with community repo stuff. Don’t wait on tooling to get started this. + * Also find a way to have additional metadata around sub-project -- meetings, notes, channels, etc. + * owner vs. maintainer -- just merge them together. Need to socialize these. + * What does making a group an owner mean? Not part of brian’s proposal. Owner is effectively TL of a sub-project. Not uniformly recognized/specified/implemented. + * Brian proposal: explicit role for sub-project. + * Michelle -- need to have a better way to reach out to repo owners/maintainers/etc. Do we want to add email addresses to these lists? + * We get nasty mail from github when we put email addresses into repo + * Ideally SIG leads communicate down + * One of the thing that Aaron did was start creating consistent OWNERS_ALIASES around SIG/subprojects/git leads. Then listed this into approvers. This caused confusion and came across as a power grab. Just starting with PR came across as aggressive. Not having good contact info meant that it was more difficult to get this stuff done. + * [tstclair] Piloting policy changes and being mindful and deliberate. + * I'd like to delay the pushing of policy until we've settled on the proposal and have a sunset timeframe on what is in and out of k-org. Once that is done then k-org should be a well defined set of repos where I agree that we should define and enforce policy. Even then, we should pilot the program and iterate with feedback to ensure that policies are not onerous. E.g. - we should not be rolling test-infra out on any repos until we’ve settled on where they should live, and even then we should pilot and gain feedback before we try to implement other policies. + * [spiffxp] attempting to document list of current kubernetes github orgs and the policies that should be applied [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1569](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1569) + * [spiffxp] attempting to make kubernetes-template-project a living example of the guidelines that repos should follow [https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project/pull/14](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project/pull/14) + * [spiffxp] would like to deprecate / remove the outside collaborator role [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1565](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1565) + * Discussion: + * Aaron -- just trying to canary stuff out and was difficult to communicate. Didn’t view it as top down but it was percieved that way. + * Brendan -- we should make sure that we categorize repos and top-down based on which repo we are talking about. Stuff in k/* will be top down. + * Michelle -- communication snafu. Did this go out to mailing list? Need to find ways to reach out before big changes land. + * Aaron -- steering committee shouldn’t be involved in every automation rollout like this. + * Brian -- no way to reach everyone. Need to look at worked before -- example is the roll out of 2FA. The roll out of github teams/aliases didn’t work so well. + * Brendan -- need to watch out when we give power to SIGs they don’t overstep. Need to make sure we give folks a way to opt out and are clear about rights/responsibilities. + * [tstclair] Follow up on Brendan’s doc and outline feedback + * [Docs ](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yauW9zMtWgXN8xh4q6144B2xBTPuIOLGc0L6aQPMj1I/edit?ts=5a3c8c55) + * Brendan going to do another pass to resolve things + * Some agreement to roll share this widely to get agreement + * Brian: the CLA/CNCF issues need to be vetted. Can we do associated projects? + * Intent is understood -- questions about mechanism. + +## January 3, 2018 + +* **Bosun**: Brandon Philips [CoreOS] (@brandonphilips) +* **Note Taker**: Brandon Philips [CoreOS] (@brandonphilips) +* **Attendees** + * Aaron Crickenberger [Samsung SDS] + * Brandon Philips [CoreOS] + * Timothy St Clair [Heptio] + * Brendan Burns [Microsoft] + * Derek Carr [Red Hat] + * Tim Hockin [Google] + * Phillip Wittrock [Google] + * Clayton Coleman [Red Hat] + * Joe Beda [Heptio] +* **Absent** + * Brian Grant [Google] + * Michelle Noorali [Microsoft] + * Sarah Novotny [Google] + * Quinton Hoole [Huawei] +* **Topics** + * [tstclair] Split up charter and elections. [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/18](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/18) + * [philips] Reminder on sprint [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/master/backlog.md#current-sprint-end-of-jan18](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/master/backlog.md#current-sprint-end-of-jan18) + * [aaron] administrivia + * Permissions [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/xXG-cUqoBbw](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/xXG-cUqoBbw) + * List of orgs we “own” ? [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1407](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1407) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1527](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1527) + * Need a bot or something to manage all of the different orgs + * TimH is going to give Aaron owner on github.com/kubernetes to start setting up management + * TimH: Everyone needs to be safe with this responsibility + * Aaron is going to spec out a tool to manage the owners access via some authoritative file that we can have the CNCF hire a contractor to implement + * Needs to eventually be the only authoritative source + * TimH: Write a + * [bburns] Proposing repo-structuring + * [Docs ](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yauW9zMtWgXN8xh4q6144B2xBTPuIOLGc0L6aQPMj1I/edit?ts=5a3c8c55) + * Open questions: + * What happens to vanity URLs for Go packages + * What happens to addons that don't have to go into core: Service Catalog, Helm, etc. Can they remain SIG projects forever? + * What is the difference between a SIG repo, a kubernetes/ repo, and an associated repo? + * Associated repo user story: it is about frictionless progression into the Kubernetes community + * End of life of a project and stability expectation setting + * [joe] Intra-SIG governance survey + * Phil put it together: [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1h41mwLlcQwQDP6c4VDZzjiJepaQ1irHjP4mXYQFQAIo/edit](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1h41mwLlcQwQDP6c4VDZzjiJepaQ1irHjP4mXYQFQAIo/edit) + * Goal is to source ideas for a recommended solution diff --git a/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2019-meeting-notes.md b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2019-meeting-notes.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..91a2bbee --- /dev/null +++ b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2019-meeting-notes.md @@ -0,0 +1,1264 @@ +## December 16, 2019 [Closed Meeting] + +* Bosun: +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Christoph +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Christoph + * Tim + * Nikhita + * Aaron +* Topics + * CNCF TOC Seat Discussion + * Will discuss on private mailing list if we wish to nominate a candidate. Christoph to send e-mail. + * Discussion on SIG Chair responsiveness + * Nikhita will review thread and try to summarize a problem statement as we see it today + +## December 2, 2019 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Paris + * Recording: [link](https://youtu.be/yLvQXNx1tJY) +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Christoph + * Dims + * Paris + * Aaron + * Tim +* Topics + * [cantbewong] Process for User Group creation in context of [pending PR](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4156) adding Charter for new VMware User Group. The [SIG/WG lifecycle doc](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/f7826ca2ddeefa4bef9b409bae2a44c5f89862cb/sig-wg-lifecycle.md) does not actually require UGs to have a charter, but perhaps it should. As prospective co-chair of the UG I would like to have a charter and I am choosing to follow the charter process for SIGs documented [here](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/f7826ca2ddeefa4bef9b409bae2a44c5f89862cb/committee-steering/governance#sig-charter-approval-process). + * Tim sc - context: sigs want to have dev discussions but user groups will help with hearing and listening to user concerns + * Dims and tsc - approve + * Steve - will open up an issue documenting the process so we can do better here so we can make documentation better here + * Christoph - if you are going to have a charter, steering should review it; but doesn’t look like its required in this case + * Steve - approval of the PR still seems ambiguous; ownership of approval + * Tim SC - documentation is missing some history - will take this as an action + * Nishi original context on UG - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c-kAYb-80eUV5aco-cw-AlGnlEn3T90_J2XNKBBCUuU/edit?usp=sharing](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c-kAYb-80eUV5aco-cw-AlGnlEn3T90_J2XNKBBCUuU/edit?usp=sharing) + * Dims: any feedback from panel @ kubecon? + * Christoph: asked for it; will share later + * Dims: any feedback from GB meeting? + * Paris: ask Michelle to attend the public meeting after GB meetings; taking as an action + * Tim SC: talked to Dan K - create a policy around getting a keynote slot for folks doing maintenance and hard work + * Looking for folks to help craft the policy + * Christoph - likes the idea of rewarding not glamorous work + * Aaron: sounds like a bug bounty + +## November 4, 2019 [Closed Meeting] + +* Bosun: tsc +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: paris / tsc +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Paris + * Tsc + * Nikhita + * Christoph + * Dims +* Topics: + * Brad’s passing what is the appropriate thing todo? [last comm from steve about memorial](https://docs.google.com/document/u/2/d/1c0IYb5XqNooztQM_y4cq3u6SW8iRnsjAkuQzURfeHJM/edit?usp=sharing&urp=gmail_link) + * Steve created a RH google doc with folks sentiments that interacted with Brad + * Would be cool to have something like this from the Kubernetes community + * Would like something to be done at kubecon as a memorial and give brads family + * Family was proud of brads technical wizardry + * words @ sig storage f2f and intro @ kubecon (saad is planning this unless there are other suggestions) + * Already done: Saad: Mailing list for storage and kdev + * family wants no flowers but contributions to st judes or humane society with notes. + * Include in keynote with links + * Timeline + * Send out an email to collect video snippets [~30 seconds] and statements (google-docs). + * Send to ChrisA collect by the 13th. + * Mention details during Sunday evening + * Mention details in the morning + * Full memorial 4:30 - 4:45 + * Saad wanted to spend some time to highlighting his accomplishments and how he impacted the community. + * Moment of silence + * (AI) Who else? + * (AI: Chris, Paris reach out to OSMI ) Offer counseling services. + * (AI: Steering) Reach out to those who may be struggling + * [chris a] tuesday night keynote [5 minutes] - has time slotted already + * The program chairs will be presenting + * Have a set of pictures that are close to him + * (AI: Saad schedule a zoom call) We could federate this out earlier and we could record via zoom, and piece it together. + * It would be nice if we could get his voice intro. + * Where to upload the videos? + * Instructions: Private youtube and share the link with ChrisA. + * Try to get the recordings together by Wed 13th + * (AI: PaulM ) Blog post on the kubernetes page post KubeCon. + * Possibly around Thanksgiving / early dec. in preparation for the family + * Memorial page possibly on contributor site + * Start with github for folks to be able to PR async then eventually move to a micro-site. + +## October 21, 2019 [Closed Meeting] + +* Bosun: timothysc +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: cblecker +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * timothysc + * parispittman + * cblecker + * nikhita + * derekwaynecarr + * dims +* Topics: + * Follow-up on CNCF liason from Steering [owner: Derek Carr] + * Michelle and Brandon had acted in this capacity prior + * Ask them to come to the next meeting. + * Code of conduct backfill, and can PR herself in [Christoph] + * GSuite Top Level Account Transfers Offboarding + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/869b7d13852d514a293b10fa82ededc270c2f40f/README.md#top-level-accounts](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/869b7d13852d514a293b10fa82ededc270c2f40f/README.md#top-level-accounts) + * Fix calendars and zoom + * Give out zoom credentials to at least 3 others [Paris] + * Get a moderator for public meetings [paris] + * Kicking out folks who are no longer on steering (slack, gsuite) [Dims] + * Establish a steering public channel and ask CNCF for a rep on our public meetings. [Nikhita] + * CNCF should attend based on the agenda. + * Should we have more visibility into the service desk requests to the CNCF? + * Open an issue against k/steering to log our efforts to encourage transparency from the CNCF + * How do we ask for help from companies? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/141](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/141) + * Policies around Kubernetes twitter + * Create a policy/procedure around the content that gets posted to the @kubernetesio twitter account + * On-boarding/off-boarding new steering committee members [nikhita] + * Issue templates for k/steering [timothysc, derekwaynecarr, Nikhita] + +## October 2, 2019 [Open Meeting] + +* Bosun: pwittrock +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: [who] + * Video: [link](https://youtu.be/5ETMCc9WcVI) + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Pwittrock + * Dims + * Bgrant + * Tsc + * Clayton + * Derek + * Jbeda + * sarahnovotny +* Topics: + * [Zach C] Third party content in K8s docs + * For reference, see discussion at: + * SIG Docs issue: [https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/15748](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/15748) + * Example issue (Falco): [https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/14332](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/14332) + * Response with guidance: [https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/15576](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/15576) + * Hosting vs linking (the example of rkt): [https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/15576#issuecomment-519254174](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/15576#issuecomment-519254174) + * Vendor pitch content: + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/15582](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/15582) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/9387](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/9387/) + * Steering committee mailing list: [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/8v8_IkHFX8M](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/8v8_IkHFX8M) + * [Paris] Come to the contributor summit + * [https://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/kubernetes-contributor-summit-north-america-2019/](https://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/kubernetes-contributor-summit-north-america-2019/) + * [Paris] Went live with outreachy -- contrib-exp, multi-tenancy, sig-api -- shout out to RedHat and CNCF + * Label issues as help wanted -- going to have an uptick in people claiming issues in 2-3w + * [Stephen] Diversity scholarships -- is there an update? + * Diversity scholarships -- announced + * Travel scholarships for folks -- if specific sig has a need for it, let “us” (Dims) know + * [Chris Conway] -- says hi and open for coffee + +## September 4, 2019 [Open Meeting] + +* Bosun: pwittrock +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: [who] + * Video: [link](https://youtu.be/8prfsvQuCkQ) + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Derek Carr + * Clayton Coleman + * Tim St Clair + * Joe Beda + * Sarah Novotny + * Phil Wittrock + * Brandon Philips + * Davanum Srinivas + * Brian Grant +* Topics + * FYI, CNCF GB meeting September 13th + * [End of term for Brandon is 2019 and Michelle Dec. 2020](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/84) + * Q&A for those thinking of running for steering [dims] + * [jorge] discuss deadlines again + * Contributor Survey is under development [paris] + * Would you like to know something about the pulse of the contributor community? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3969](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3969) + * Contributor Summit SC plans [paris] + * Do you want a session? Your panel has been approved on the main track. We can still have a q&a at some point during the day or forward folks to the main track session. + +## August 21, 2019 [Closed Meeting] + +* Bosun: Phil +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Joe + * Video: [who] [link] + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron + * Joe + * Michelle + * Dims + * Phil + * Sarah + * Derek + * Brandon +* Topics + * Change bosun + * [Michelle] CoCC - how to deal with conflicts of interest + * Questions around COA around nominating people. + * I.e. who can stand to be on the CoCC? + * Questions? Employment -- building software to sell to LF around CoCC management software + * What is the bar for recusal vs. bar for not being able to be on the committee? + * What about “grounds for removal” applied for first election? + * One possible hole: What if committee can’t come to recusal decision? What if the whole committee is compromised? + * Steering handles nomination process so we can apply filter there. Perhaps put guidance in the nomination form + * AI: Need to visit recusal process in CoCC charter [Aaron? Phil?] + * Escape hatches for backfilling CoCC positions from SC members + * [Michelle] CoCC election check in + * Done + * [Aaron] Steering election check in + * Members of standing and exception process + * We have opinions but we are looking to delegate this to contribx. With oversight by SC? + * [Discussion on how to identify active members and reach out to them instead of having them reach to us] + * Our criteria for members -- do we have a good way to measure if we are hitting the right bar? + * Some metrics: number of exceptions requested. Turnout. Analysis of voting blocks and bad faith actors. + * Hard to do experiments. We just have to guess and go. + * Roll call on who is looking to run -- lots of folks are not looking to re-run. Didn’t get exhaustive list though. + * Questions on encouraging others to run? What are the guidelines we are holding ourselves to? + * Can’t publicly endorse. + * Perhaps person to person privately encourage? Seems like everyone is ok with this + * Idea: create forums for potential candidates to learn about what it means to be on the SC + * AI [Dims to start the ball rolling] : Communication: Bob and George out, Brian may be the best person to reach out to + * Please do your [bias training](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/98) + * Keep track of who has taken it -- self report + * When is the last day? Do we want to try and get a picture at KubeCon San Diego + * What are our agendas for our remaining meetings. Last meeting is Wed Oct 2. + +## August 7, 2019 [Open Meeting] + +* Bosun: Michelle Noorali +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Josh Berkus/ Jason DeTiberus + * Video: [link](https://youtu.be/OTejGx_FHOk) + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger + * Michelle Noorali + * Clayton Coleman + * Derek Carr + * Davanum Srinivas + * Brian Grant + * Joe Beda +* Topics + * Public meetings are first wed of each month, private meetings every 3rd wed. + * Project Board Review: August Milestones + * Documenting Bias Training requirement: moved to August + * Ecosystem Project governance: Did Nikita take care of this? SC needs to decide whether it's done. Will vote to close on ML + * Elections Meta-Issue: 2 things needed from SC, based on last election. Some issues still need to be addressed before we can get started on the upcoming election. There's also an operations issue in the community repo. May still need to review the Members of Standing process, and need to guage how many voters there should be. SC needs to appoint the election officers before we can go further. Michelle will follow-up. Nobody has yet done a review of the MoS information; Brian's concern is that we have more repositories and subprojects than we used to and maybe we need to check criteria. Aaron: using last year's criteria, we will have 800+ voters. Last year was around 700, and about 300 voted. Devstats doesn't cover some kinds of activity, so we may be undercounting some folks. Paris: we had around 30 exceptions last time, 50/50 legit exceptions vs. randoms. Aaron: we could consider increasing the threshold if we want to shrink the pool. + * + * Need a Reminder Calendar for SC Processes: Dims item, doesn't have any ideas or updates. Moving to August + * Process for Travel Support for Kubernetes Contributors: folks will fill out a form. Need to decided on what group determines who gets funding. Dims: this is for multiple events, not just for Contributor Summit, but may not qualify for the existing CNCF program. Not clear whether we'll be able to do anything in time for San Diego. Not really prepared for funding in time for 2019; this is more for 2020. CNCF can help with travel letters etc. if not with funding. Jorge: we want to at least select a group of people. Paris: Contribex can own the selection process, SC can own the funding process. Joe: can we collect data on who could use funding for the CS? + * Code of Conduct Docs: The Charter for the CoC committee was approved. But does not include how people are elected to the CoCC. There is a PR with a proposal for elections. Aaron: needs to have representation language, can't be mono-employer. Michelle: maybe same language as SC? Aaron: teh CoCC should decide on those rules, there should just be something. Further discussion will happen on PRs and issues. + * Slack User Moderation Needs a New Home: SIG-contribex is dubious about owning Slack, simply because end-users on Slack outnumber contributors, so it's not really Contribex. This applies to other user communities. Looking for help from the CNCF. We could request a person; need someone to own this and write a job description. + * Next CoCC election: Micelle to send out messages to all parties, will set date to elect 2 new members by August 15th. + * Aaron asked whether this format for the public meeting, which mostly does milestone issues, is useful. + * Discussion on election procedures ensued. + +## July 17, 2019 [Closed Meeting] + +* Bosun: who +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: who + * Video: [who] [link] + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Attendees here +* Topics + +## July 3, 2019 [Open Meeting] + +* Bosun: ? +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Thank you Paris + * Video: [link](https://youtu.be/nD829DWngZo) + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Clayton + * Brian + * Sarah + * Tim SC + * Bphilips + * dims + * bburns +* Topics + * [Joe] API review process/scope. [community#3864](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3864) and [email thread](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/kubernetes-sig-architecture/FTDK-90gGRA/gHq9tH_BCwAJ). + * [Brian]: This doesn’t seem like a Steering topic + * [Clayton] agree, should go to sig-arch first + * [Joe]: discussing sigs that reach across other sigs + * [Brian]: maybe some affordance needed for certain things (gave prow as example) + * [Joe]: are we weighing in on core data model or something else? seems/might be a bottleneck + * [Jordan]: trying to spread out knowledge, some of the conventions you have to follow to use crds; have some tooling for built in types; get some of these tools in place so that we find problems and aren’t counting on human eyeballs to catch all of these issues. Until that, doesn’t seem like a great approach to say lets - not? + * [Tim SC] Problem is governance and autonomy; we wanted k/k bar to be high but now that bar can be which is why we created the governance model of `core/sigs/associated`. + * [Joe]: What’s in scope for an api review? We need to make it clear during a review its ok to say that you are not following the conventions, etc. What I don’t want to happen is - I don’t like the way you modeled the solution to this problem. What should be handled as part of a larger KEP process? + * Clayton + brian - this convo needs to be in sig arch + * [Joe]: the question is what do we mean by api reviews in the arch charter + * [Clayton]: never defined the grey area between sigs + others; semantics part (do we have an effective process with resolving this consumers); talk about semantics of why in sig arch + * [Joe]: api approver does not equal architectural master + * [Jordan]: tech leads in sigs/sig reps handle that arch stuff; tim sc will follow up + * [Tim] CIS Benchmarks and oversight + * Who does that report into? What’s the SIG structure? [TIM SC] + * SIG Auth [clayton] + * Reports for deployment benchmarks are not great [TIM SC] + * Put a blog post and say that we reject these standards? [bphilips] + * [https://www.cisecurity.org/benchmark/kubernetes/](https://www.cisecurity.org/benchmark/kubernetes/) + * Discuss with SIG Auth that we are seeing issues; if folks are having trouble with standards we can discuss [bp] + * [Paris] Contributor Summit + * There will be a proposal by July 15 + * [https://github.com/orgs/kubernetes/projects/21](https://github.com/orgs/kubernetes/projects/21) + * [bit.ly/contrib-summit-notes](https://bit.ly/contrib-summit-notes) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/events/events-team](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/events/events-team) + * Amazing open source event documentation :D + * [Brandon] First funding request! + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/3](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/3) + * Summary of discussion [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/3](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/3) + +## June 19, 2019 [Closed Meeting] + +* Bosun: Michelle +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Josh Berkus (on separate notepad) + * Video: [who] [link] + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Michelle Noorali + * Derek Carr + * Brian Grant + * Phil Wittrock + * Aaron Crickenberger + * Brandon Philips + * Dims + * Joe Beda + * Clayton Coleman + * Tim St. Clair +* Topics + * General reminder: Please take inclusive speaker training. [Issue #98](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/98) + * Community Experience Manager proposal + * **AI: Ask for role description on job board** + * Contributor Summit - how to proceed + * [Budget deck](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1HHsjzgiwbr08DLA0mCrEhNu5JKYUFBRSJ3_mk_R5Oi0/edit#slide=id.g5b12766f2f_0_10) + * 400-600 attendees is estimated at $100k-$250k + * We don’t understand why it costs so much -- a detailed breakdown would be useful + * An issue is sponsorships or not + * Aaron: prefer not + * Joe: don’t want to favor specfic vendors + * Brandon: where is the line? Logo on boards? Intro during event? Logos on tshirts? We need to make it clear. + * Joe: All goes into a big pot. Not visibility regarding where the funds go. + * Michelle: Paris made good points (in a doc) about why it should be covered by the conference sponsorships at large. + * Clayton: Everything less than “talks are sponsored” is fine with me + * Joe: Don’t want to monetize the contributors + * Brandon: [Linux Plumbers](https://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/blog/2019/registration-is-open-for-the-2019-linux-plumbers-conference/) is sponsored + * We should understand ROI -- do we have specific goals, and are we achieving them? + * There are contributors from other projects that have shifted effort to Kubernetes as a result of onboarding at Kubecon EU contrib. Summit + * **AI: ask planning committee for this plan of action** + * **AI: ask planning committee for their view on what is sponsorship and what they would/would not like to see** + * **AI: ask planning committee for requirements around event** + * Joe: EU summit was around new members and new contributors. Is there where focus will continue? + +## June 5, 2019 [Open Meeting] + +* Bosun: Michelle +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Josh Berkus (on separate notepad) + * Video: [who] [link] + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Derek Carr + * Dims + * Joe Beda + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Brandon Philips + * Brendon Burns + * Clayton Coleman + * Michelle Noorali +* Observers: + * Mike Spreitzer - IBM + * Paris, Google + * Jorge Castro - VMware + * Chris hoge +* Topics + * Moving forward with budget request [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/106](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/106) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/3663](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/3663) + * CoCC nominations and appointments + * Review process [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3353](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3353) + * The bootstrapping doc that was used last time [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-code-of-conduct/bootstrapping-process.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-code-of-conduct/bootstrapping-process.md) + * Select Steering liaison to help carry out the process + * What happens when there is only one active SIG chair? [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/3714](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/3714) + * Follow up on Inclusivity training for steering members. LF has an option we could us and seems like a reasonable start: [https://training.linuxfoundation.org/training/inclusive-speaker-orientation/](https://training.linuxfoundation.org/training/inclusive-speaker-orientation/) + * Should we look to complete this by the next public Steering meeting? It’s a 2hr course. + * Where would document that we’ve completed this training? + * Kubernetes Blog Update - shoutout to Kaitlyn + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/sig-docs/blog-subproject](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/sig-docs/blog-subproject) + * [Transparency around KubeCon Diversity Scholarships](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/d/msg/steering/12g6Ra1fDEs/9v07uRVDBQAJ) + +Meeting Notes: + +* Let's start with milestoning, a quick glance to see what's still active for June + +* Slack User Moderation proposal from Paris & Jorge. The SC needs to review & approve it so that it can go to the governing board. + +* Community Resource Management: document resources. Not sure that this actually includes a comprehensive catalog (Aaron). Like, we called out the blog, but there may be other stuff. + + * The Blog now has a subproject (https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/sig-docs/blog-subproject), and have just released the guidelines around it. Bob Killen, Paris, and Jorge are involved; roles are defined. There will be a meeting later this month (Kaitlyn), if you care about the blog you should attend. + + * Are there other channels that belong to CNCF that the community should own? Some things are fine with the CNCF like the twitter account. + + * (Joe Beda) there are resources owned by companies that aren't clear are not community resources like the podcast. We should review these. (several people) This was discussed on the mailing list, nobody responded. Argument about what happened during past discussions and what we should do in the future ensued. + +* Document User Group formation process. (Aaron) this is happening, I don't know if there's paperwork left to do but people are making user groups. + +* Cloud Provider SIG/SIG deprecation: (Tim) it's in progress, they're working through it. The SC doesn't need to do anything but wait. (Aaron) It might be good to set a deadline for this, maybe set a July milestone? + +* Budget Request and Approval: (Bob) right now there's no official process to ask for funding or to have it approved. People use CNCF servicedesk. We're documenting this, and will have a funding repo for people to post requests and gather information about it. (Mike S) I was expecting more of an annual budget planning thing. (Michelle) Is this just for sub-$250 requests? No, it's for all requests, the under-250 ones have lower requirements. What about requests for non-monetary resources like contractors? Same thing. (Paris) Contributor Summits should be on there, but we have no idea of budget for those. CNCF will be sharing information. (Michelle) usually we request specific items and the CNCF comes back with a spec, dollars aren't discussed specifically. + + * Will put PR up on Steering for a formal vote. + +* Code of Conduct Committee: + + * First task: create a charter for the committee. There is a PR for it, needs review. Some discussion of charter approval process ensued. + + * The COCC needs a selection process for new members, team will follow up with a draft document for that. + + * Michelle recounted the history of how the COCC was formed, and how the charter got bootstrapped. Discussed process for nominations and selection of committee members, which is currently that the SC nominates and the SC selects. Maybe we should have a public nomination process? (Josh) I'm concerned that this could be a pretext for a flamewar. (Michelle) we can have a public call for nominations, but they will go to the SC in closed session. We can put that call out now, and have a selection by the end of July. + +* (Aaron) I'd like to revoke the SC's admin privileges from the K/K repo. I think we can trust the github admins for this. Will follow up with lazy consensus on mailing list. + +* (Michelle) Steering will be taking an inclusivity training to avoid unconsious bias, given by the LF. Please comment on this issue with what you think about this, otherwise just take it and report that you have. + +* SIG Service Catalog is down to one chair. Do they need to find another chair? Aaron would like them to, otherwise we need to figure out if this should be a subproject. Will submit a PR for a new chair. + +* (Paris) There's a discussion, process for selecting recipients of diversity scholarships is not very transparent. Some folks were denied funding to Barcelona. Maybe community should be able to select people by contributor status. (Dims) as long as we don't have two queues, people should have one application. Appeal process with steering committee needs to be discoverable. (Dan) can we talk about this privately? We can't share the applications in public. Also, we maybe shouldn't be doing "contributor" scholarships under the diversity program. Further discussion of diversity scholarships ensued. + +## April 24, 2019 + +* Bosun: Tim St. Clair +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: [pwittrock] + * Video: [who] [link] + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Derek Carr (first 34m only) + * Aaron Crickenberger + * Brandon Philips + * Dims + * Sarah Novotny +* Observers: + * Rodrigo Dias - IBM +* Topics + * Topics? + * [pwittrock] [User Group](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/3620) + * Do UGs fall under a SIG or do they roll up directly under SIGs? + * What would Big Data roll up into? Apps? + * [Aaron] For working groups it was necessary to have stakeholder SIGs because they can’t own code + * [Bob] Example: Combining SIG AWS into cloud provider SIG - has users show up - k8s on AWS UG makes sense to propose. + * [Aaron] We need to make sure the project isn’t blessing things in the user groups. In favor of cloud user groups. Unclear why we need to tie the UG to the SIG formally. + * (having trouble hearing Tim and Brendan due to connection issues) + * [Joe] Meta data of having a SIG may be useful + * [Tim] Main concern with rolling into steering is timely response - only point of contention. + * [Brian] Made bar 1 or 2 SC members and make lazy consensus after that. - don’t need a high bar - just need a sanity check + * [Dims] 2 sponsoring SC members. + * [pwittrock] lazy consensus + 1-2 explicit ACKs? + * [Tim] that sounds good + * [Dims] Want to make sure topic can be discussed in multiple user groups - no a single owner + * Q: who sponsors? Question if it is a SIG or steering committee? What level of support? Quorum or lazy consensus? + * + * [Dims] [Kube-batch -> volcano](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kubernetes-sig-scheduling/z5EPwJJgJdg) + * Traffic going on in SIG scheduling + * SIG scheduling owns kubebatch + * People working on kubebatch want to expand the scope of the project + * [Quinton] did originate out of a broader problem - solve batch related things for Big Data + * Kubebatch was actually Phase 1 of a broader set of problems on k8s + * App management, lifecycle, accelerators, data flow optimizations, etc + * When you run on k8s - run into problems - tensorflow, spark, etc + * Broader scope effort is called volcano - broader scope effort spans SIGs + * [Derek] - has some questions on things that aren’t clear in the description + * <missed it>...accelerators, alternative container runtimes like singularity were mentioned + * [Quinton] some stuff overlaps with sig node + * Could be incorporated into Kubernetes overtime - e.g. container runtimes + * Under purview of specific SIGs + * Do it incrementally and prove its value rather than all at once + * [Derek] + * How do we map it back to other projects as they come up (ie. virtual kubelet) + * With the scope as big as implied, are there other CNCF projects that could be the home + * [Quinton] + * Used by upstream projects + * Could certainly be kicked up to the CNCF and out of the Kubernetes context + * Aimed at running jobs specifically at Kubernetes - do we still kick this sort of stuff up into CNCF + * [Bobby] In past, asked if plan to donate to CNCF - answer was “no” + * Sounds like what Quinton just aid, that it is possible will donate + * [Quinton] not excluding that as an option + * What do we do about a repo that straddles multiple SIGs + * [Bobby] if spanning multiple sigs and is a larger project - may be a separate project + * [Joe] Also could be a working group... + * [Quinton] Prefer to have a semantic name + * [Dims] What is the decision making process that we need to follow - main thing **putting a hold on is the rename of the repository** + * [Brendan] We should hold the rename - should be either WG or UG + * [Quinton] these don’t own code + * [Aaron] WG should figure out which groups should own code + * [Brandon] Why does it need to go in this repo if it is a scheduling component + * [Tim] (has some background) - does make sense, but agree that it is so broad + * [Brendan] Do you want to be a WG - Helm for instance out grew WG and became its own project + * [Quinton] Additional code is being added that makes the repo name no longer suitable + * Putting in CNCF seems like the next decision to make + * CNCF seems reasonable - it is only k8s, does it makes sense to push up to the CNCF + * [Brandon] ToC can make that decision + * [Brendan] Helm was in the same boat - it is k8s only + * (Helm asked to leave the project) + * [Joe] Helm asked to leave because of some enforcement of consistency across project + * [Brian] Being K8s specific is 100% *not* a blocker - there are other projects like Rook that are there + * As k8s expands there will be more projects like this + * [Brendan] SIGs own the code - SIG scheduling should make the decision + * [Joe] If SC thinks outside scope - then SC decision + * [Brendan] SIG scheduling should come to SC with that if they think it is outside the cope + * Moving on... + * [bgrant0607] Is the velocity report useful?: [https://app.trendkite.com/report?id=70270dee-d7e1-4b1d-8948-12feec612055](https://app.trendkite.com/report?id=70270dee-d7e1-4b1d-8948-12feec612055) + * Mailed out to maintainers list (everyone on SC should be on this) + * Take a look - if there are things we want that are not in it we should give that feedback + * Should decide if it is useful + * Can decide to share more broadly within the project - world readable link - not sure who else would care + * Slide on use cases and concerns is interesting + * Take a look and have follow up discussion on mailing list + * [spiffxp] update on subproject owners + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1673#issuecomment-484746226](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1673#issuecomment-484746226) + * Follow up from last time + * SIG cloud provider - want something common across projects, but want individual projects to have technical leaders. + * Need tighter definition of sub project owners + * Do we want to add a new field called owners to OWNERS files. + * Should be decentralized or centralized source of truth + * What if assume projects owners are approvers common across OWNERS files + * Can keep going in this direction - or can define centrally + * Straw poll to see if anyone cares.... + * [dims] go with what you have + * [bgrant] sig apps going through this, and they need central location - they put it in the ALIASES - need a top level approver for making changes. Sig apimachinery is canonical example. + * [spiffxp] … want to live in a world where this lands in github teams that can be referenced. + * Ultimately want k8s org to have files that update team - can use PR process + * Sigs have final say of who lands in what teams - need automation to make it happen + * [timstclair] Have had this need for a long time. Think its a good idea + * [spiffxp] on key advocate - *not* add another key to the owners files. Live with approvers and reviewers. + * [bgrant] does that mean also not have github team for owners? + * [spiffxp] ...can user file hierarchy. ** Subproject owners must be in fields consumed by the machinery so that they are empowered.** + * [timstclair] affects so many people, we should have a KEP to integrate multiple people processes systems. + * AI: Aaron to work on a KEP + * [spiffxp] will follow up + * [Joe] names splattered everywhere is confusing - follow up later + * [Moving on to backlog… + * 3 new issues + * Leadership trainings (tim pepper) + * [timstclair] may belongs in contribx + * [brandon] yes contribx, but need a way to get money - tied to funding issues + * Closing.... + * Basic governance of subprojects + * Questions that came up for Volcano + * What rules apply to subprojects if core depends on them + * Basic interface projects don’t have rules + * What about addons - if they are done as CRDs - what space do they live in + * [bgrant] + * Talking about the design of the interfaces - or the plugins that implement them? + * [timstclair] + * As we have layers that core depends up - might want to have stratification + * Basic questions of governance w.r.t. To voting - who decides when a subproject gets created + * Need to refine it - should have a voting mechanism + * [aaron] + * Voting with lazy consensus is what you start with + * In practice everyone just goes to chairs + * Contribx does voting + * [timstclair] + * Sig cluster lifecycle also does voting + * Someone open a PR for this + * Just because has kubernetes in name - doesn’t mean it is part of kubernetes + * [bobby] + * Sometimes the fact that a project is sponsored by Kubernetes brings trust worthy-ness + * No guarantees of quality on these subprojects + * Leadership may change over time - what happens + * [spiffxp] + * SIG arch should make these decisions + * [bgrant] + * If part of Kubernetes release - increasingly high bar + * If clarify standard bar for the release itself - then can work with sigs to see if their subprojects meet the bar + * [spiffxp] + * Who is in charge of what goes into the release + * [timstclair] + * Pieces of governance and pieces of sig arch + * [spiffxp] + * Voting piece falls to steering + * [timstclair] + * Language of guarantees should be SC + * [bobby] + * If have higher bar for core vs non-core then need to explicitly say what it is + * [Joe] + * As we break up k/k we need to define if it is part of the core + * [spiffxp] + * Worthwhile to say what sponsorship implies, + * [timstclair] + * We can assign people to create PRs w.r.t. these bullet points + * [Dims] + * We tried this both ways in openstack and it was a nightmare + * Folks who want to be involved + * Joe + * Aaron + * Derek + * Quorum (spiffxp) - merged + * Funding and budget + * Brandon filed PR for this - needs review - 1.5 pages - not too long to review + * Code of conduct documentation + * [Paris] PR coming today or tomorrow for charter + * Slack moderation + * [Jorge] Meeting with Michelle to talk about in an hour + * Find home + * Talked about docs last time - have spreadsheet about other areas + * [Paris] List of communication channels - yet to be PRed in + * [Aaron] description is about code and github stuff - Paris talking about github channels + * [timstclair] need concrete list of curated things + * [Paris] I only have communication platforms + * [Brian] Have things that have fallen through the cracks - e.g. build system came up this morning - the original intent of the issue. Have other things we have taken on over time that have come up since issue was filed. + * [Aaron] Don’t have a list. Too much work to centrally go try to find things without owners. + * Lets close the issue - everything listed has been resolved - new things will get new issues. + +## April 10, 2019 + +* Bosun: Tim St. Clair +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: [] + * Video: [who] [[link](https://youtu.be/X3ySJ09clgQ)] + * Chat: [who] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Tim St. Clair + * Derek Carr + * Clayton Coleman + * Phillip Wittrock +* Observers: + * Your name here + * Paris Pittman + * Alex Handy + * Nikhita Raghunath + * Bob Killen + * Rahulkrishnan R A + * Josh Berkus +* Topics + * (10) Follow up on AIs from last meeting: + * [Paris + Brandon & Michelle] CNCF Ticket on GSuite + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3541](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3541) + * AI: Follow up again next time. + * [Phil] Follow up on documentation on user group formation [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/92](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/92) + * Response has been great and folks have a draft going. + * About ½ dozen folks were also interested. + * Looking at the contributor latter. + * AI: Create a follow on item + * (5) Can WG’s have other WG’s as stakeholders ([thread](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/d/msg/steering/sDIgMImNpgY/iWSYvgE_BQAJ)) + * Leaning No. + * (~20) [dnishi/andrewsykim] Transitioning cloud provider SIGs as subprojects ([https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/65](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/65)) + * Proposal: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/16IAOspFVbGWd3RZg6h7uE3WXlRuvWDNnjBPxwITAda4/edit#](https://docs.google.com/document/d/16IAOspFVbGWd3RZg6h7uE3WXlRuvWDNnjBPxwITAda4/edit#) + * AI(aaron): We could follow up with a proposed best-practices model + * When can we expect the move out of k/k? + * Ongoing, and all the other sigs are working and aware. + * How can ensure better documentation in the future? + * This is P0 for 1.15 cycle. + * (Remainder) Walking [kubernetes/steering May milestone](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/milestone/1) + * [jorge] Slack moderation - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/96](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/96) + * [spiffxp] We lack a definition of quorum [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/97](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/97) + * Should we take this to the mailing list? + +## March 27, 2019 + +* Bosun: Tim St. Clair +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Josh Berkus [] + * Video: [set-uploader] [[link](https://youtu.be/X3ySJ09clgQ)] + * Chat: [set-uploader] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Derek Carr - Red Hat + * Brandon Philips - Red Hat + * Tim St. Clair, Joe Beda- VMware + * Dims + * Phillip Wittrock [@pwittrock] - Google + * Aaron Crickenberger [@spiffxp] - Google + * Michelle Noorali [@michelleN] - Microsoft + * Sarah Novotny [@sarahnovotny] - Google +* Observers + * Paris Pittman + * Mike Crute - AWS + * Jason DeTiberus + * Alex Handy [@vonguard] - Red Hat +* Topics + * + * Gsuite, slack, etc -> managing proprietary community infra without access to the support folks + * Just received a Gsuite, and google support folks could help a lot. + * We don’t seem to have appropriate line of communications with those folks. + * Google will only talk with primary points of contact. + * Proposal - Have a dedicated accounts for the sig-leads. + * [Brandon] He hasn’t seen any of the service desk tickets. + * Paris is getting the ticket links out. + * Who is the primary on the account? + * A person on the CNCF + * TODO: Sharing the service desk account with key K8s folks. + * Aren’t the 3 steering committee members admins of the GSuite account? [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering#top-level-accounts](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering#top-level-accounts) + * - Managing proprietary infra without access to support: + * - Paris: thinking of getting Gsuite account, because that will get us access to support for our use of Gsuite, instead of through CNCF. Right now we can't get help because of the indirection via the CNCF. G support won't talk to anyone except account holders. + * - Proposal: have dedicated account for SIG-Leads + * - This also means that we could give folks email addresses, so that they're not using personal emails for administration tasks + * - Discussion ensued around goals. A lot of the problems are around moderation. + * - Next steps is to get a list of problems, then to talk to the CNCF about resolving them. + * - Also, add everything to the servicedesk request queue for the CNCF. We need to document if they are being responsive. + * + * Walking the latest milestone. + * - Milestone review + * - The SC is now doing milestones, just to set deadlines for things. All their queue has now been grouped into milestones. + * - Formalize sub-projects: Tim, Dims did PRs for this. They think it's done, but want feedback before closing. Several voted to close; there are improvements in the pipeline but they have their own issues. + * - Document User Group Formation: Assigned to Phil, he's not sure what he should be doing and wants feedback from contributor management. Aaron says that we need a document that explains what a UG is and what resources they are entitled to, and how they are different from WGs. Phil would like someone else to take the lead on this and help formalize it, but currently there aren't any volunteers. He'll solicit community participation on mailing lists. + * - Nishi and Kim will give an update next SC meeting about *Cloud Provider SIG*. All the CPs have agreed to merge under one SIG. Ideally, this merge should happen before Barcelona but we'll see. + * - Community Resouce Management: Paris feels that this is complete. But the blog, see below. + * - Aaron asked about the Owners for the blog; currently the only owners are Linux Foundation staff. Is this a problem? The Blog is an artifact, and it's not assigned to a SIG; SIG-Docs disclaims it. Does the SC want to claim ownership? Dan says that Zack and Kaitlyn own it because they have been doing it. This helps ensure that the content is vendor-neutral. Folks are good with it becoming a sub-project of SIG-Docs. Josh pointed out that nobody from the community is offering to help with the blog. Joe pointed out that, something has to be under a SIG or it belongs to the SC. + * - Word of the day: "SIGtatorship" (thanks, Tim!) + * [https://kubernetes.io/docs/contribute/start/#write-a-blog-post](https://kubernetes.io/docs/contribute/start/#write-a-blog-post) -> blog post submission process + + Zoom Chat -- + From Jason DeTiberus to Everyone: (01:02 PM) + So stoked that I'm not the only one with a Closet Office + + From jberkus to Everyone: (01:02 PM) + as usual, I'm going to take notes on a notepad + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:03 PM) + Wow look at Phil’s cool shadeslove your shirt Aaron + + From [steering] Aaron of SIG Beard to Everyone: (01:05 PM) + Tim: trying to follow along, what are re running off of, k/steering milestone or project board? + + From Phillip Wittrock to Everyone: (01:13 PM) + I suspect it will be: https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A%22May+2019%22 + + From jberkus to Everyone: (01:13 PM) + it looks like someone else is on notes?if so, I'm happy not to take them + + From Tim St. Clair to Everyone: (01:13 PM) + What phil said.@josh please help, I'm doing double duty. + + From jberkus to Everyone: (01:16 PM) + ok. I'm taking notes on a notepadgodocs is too laggy for me + + From Joe Beda to Everyone: (01:17 PM) + We don't pay for slack or github + + From jberkus to Everyone: (01:18 PM) + true + + From vonguard to Everyone: (01:18 PM) + it's about administration lines + + From [steering] Aaron of SIG Beard to Everyone: (01:18 PM) + For context here’s the steering thread where Paris first started talking about using suite https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/d/msg/steering/my_roZIKuXo/I-pjrrvrDwAJ + + From vonguard to Everyone: (01:18 PM) + not just the $ + + From [steering] Aaron of SIG Beard to Everyone: (01:19 PM) + including a proposal https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LO46EUDzEpfd-8XUGH8a9OdJiPkqFznnkWpqO056_YE/edithttps://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3362 would be the closest issue I can find that mentions gsuite now + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:20 PM) + We also pay for zoomand administer that + + From Jason DeTiberus to Everyone: (01:22 PM) + Aaron!!! + + From Tim Pepper to Everyone: (01:22 PM) + lolz + + From Bob Killen to Everyone: (01:22 PM) + lol + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:23 PM) + This is why I want to talk to someone at google + + From briangrant to Everyone: (01:25 PM) + If SIG Contributor Experience owns the issue, I think we should delegate the decision to them + + From Me to Everyone: (01:25 PM) + +1 + + From Me to Everyone: (01:25 PM) + I think we’re here to support the request and escalation + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:26 PM) + Nice!Looks greathttps://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/3174/files + + From [steering] Aaron of SIG Beard to Everyone: (01:30 PM) + Lol awesome michelle + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:31 PM) + I will help spread the word and your emails to the mailing list Phil + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:31 PM) + Cherry mx keys? + + From Bob Killen to Everyone: (01:31 PM) + cherry reds? :P + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:31 PM) + LOL + + From Bob Killen to Everyone: (01:31 PM) + lol + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:31 PM) + lol + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:34 PM) + https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/communicationhttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Pmlj5nN_QJ3rRlc-HKOLfRdYY5qCWPMjnNPAdZZ22tg/edit?usp=sharing^ owners of key stuff + + From Bob Killen to Everyone: (01:35 PM) + Kaitlyn Barnard (LF) is the general approver, she does run posts etc by other members of the community (myself and jorge) + + From Brandon Philips to Everyone: (01:36 PM) + https://github.com/kubernetes/website/blob/4a8f9e8fd5dcdad3a08d8c1c0e21d5262f62675e/content/en/blog/OWNERS + + From jberkus to Everyone: (01:36 PM) + also, nobody from the community has volunteered to help with review + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:36 PM) + And this isn’t in sig docs charter? + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:36 PM) + i thought they own the content as wellAnd then own the owners files with those peopleThey also own the style and content guideso the community owns that and can make changes to that + + From Brandon Philips to Everyone: (01:37 PM) + Zach https://github.com/zacharysarah + + From Bob Killen to Everyone: (01:38 PM) + It is informal, but the content is run by community members. + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:38 PM) + seems like sig docs should own the content imo since its run by community members and they uphold a style and content guide + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:39 PM) + And then if we have problems with eh content and style guide we file an issue against that + + From Brandon Philips to Everyone: (01:40 PM) + https://github.com/kubernetes/website/blob/master/content/en/blog/OWNERS note that the master branch has a reduced OWNERS than what I linked + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:40 PM) + Good discussion topic Aaron+!+1* + + From [steering] Aaron of SIG Beard to Everyone: (01:43 PM) + I think all I’m proposing here is to make the blog a subproject, staffable by more than LF, and to have it owned by sig-docs + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:43 PM) + Favorite term of 2019: “SIGtatorship” + + From Me to Everyone: (01:43 PM) + +100 + + From Brandon Philips to Everyone: (01:43 PM) + Aaron's got this lets move on + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:44 PM) + +1 SarahI can help set that up. + + From Me to Everyone: (01:44 PM) + Thank you. + + From Joe Beda to Everyone: (01:45 PM) + https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/12905 + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:45 PM) + https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uYM7lSNPpY5THAK8vx5RndCoYLQOrYgPtWlzrlvgirA/edit + + From Joe Beda to Everyone: (01:45 PM) + Paris -- don't have permission + + From Brandon Philips to Everyone: (01:46 PM) + we literally have no idea, let Aaron investigateplease stop speculating everyoneNEXT TOPICS + + From Paris to Everyone: (01:46 PM) + https://kubernetes.io/docs/contribute/start/#write-a-blog-post^^ thats the process + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:46 PM) + It’s cool this is what we do + + From Joe Beda to Everyone: (01:47 PM) + that process clearly wasn't followed for the PR that I pointed to. + + From [steering] Aaron of SIG Beard to Everyone: (01:47 PM) + I’m not sure I’ve ever seen Brandon go all-caps lol + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:47 PM) + lol + + From Joe Beda to Everyone: (01:47 PM) + or maybe it was sent to the form that isn't public from what I can see + + From jberkus to Everyone: (01:51 PM) + gah, I have to dropany further notes are up to someone else + + From Me to Everyone: (01:53 PM) + my apologies, I have to drop now too. + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:53 PM) + no worriesBye have a good day + + From Michelle Noorali to Everyone: (01:53 PM) + i have an adjacent topic + +## March 13, 2019 + +* Bosun: Tim St. Clair +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: [Jeffrey Sica] + * Video: [[link](https://youtu.be/X3ySJ09clgQ)] + * Chat: [set-uploader] [link] +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Phillip Wittrock, Brian Grant - Google + * Dims - Huawei + * Clayton Coleman, Derek Carr - Red Hat +* Observers + * Craig Peters - Microsoft + * Jeffrey Sica - University of Michigan + * Nikhita Raghunath - Loodse +* Topics + * Contributor summit review + feedback + * [https://docs.google.com/document/d/17GFme584-XkkwYpqpzwg__LeCHBRXY-a9SZkr1wUJFc/edit#](https://docs.google.com/document/d/17GFme584-XkkwYpqpzwg__LeCHBRXY-a9SZkr1wUJFc/edit#) + * Missing aspect with Contributor summit for senior / experienced contributors + * Email sent to Steering re: Summit feedback, soliciting Steering Committee + * Lots of subprojects, summit should be a bridge to other areas. + * We already have f2f planned, maybe try to organize hallway-tracks more + * How many contributors going to Barcelona? We need to ramp up additional contributors in EU + * Last contrib summit in EU was mostly Americans. + * Thought: Make EU Contrib summit for New Contributors to ramp up additional contributors and grow our base/diversity. + * Current plan is to have several hour long hallway track -- Sigs should have an easy way to request/set up an F2F + * What about deep dives? + * Deep dives don’t foster conversations, they educate in-depth a specific discussion + * They aren’t meant to foster development/work. + * Unconference? + * Socials are beneficial, letting people set the agenda organically. But, not an organized working space. + * Project Blocking + * Tim St. Clair pruned backlog, proposes new format/process re: Milestones. + * Make a solid milestone for May 8th + * Clean up / Audit of WGs + * Original spreadsheet stalled, but PRs still submitted. Do any WGs need to be pruned or addressed? + * Two passes have already been done + * Jorge Castro has been going through and actively engaging/pruning WGs + * wg-ML is left + * What about Apply? + * Apply has gone to alpha, still needs to go to beta/GA. It’s active and helpful. Once GA, the wg should be re-evaluated. + * Charter Meta issue + * Should this be kept open? Most charters have been merged at this point. + * Maybe instead open new Issues for specific charters? Nods all around. + * Steering committee charter + * Needs several lgtms still, see checkboxes next to names :) + * Document Working Groups + * Contribex already has docs on how to form/disband sig-working groups. + * Some updates need to be done to the doc, but the issue in Steering can be closed and the remaining things tracked in the community repo + * Formalizing sub-projects within SIGs + * Nikhita working on remains, several questions within issue + * We’re trying to organize people into SIGs, and code into subprojects and OWNERS files. Subprojects try to link the two. + * Should we change the terminology for subprojects and leads? + * Tech Leads instead of Owners? + * A lot of subprojects don’t have their own meetings, and are discussed in the SIG meeting. + * Subprojects need a point of contact, and the current owners files are insufficient to point someone in the right direction. + * Add more metadata about things like: mailing lists, slack channels, and meetings. + * Should we reach out to SIGs for them to populate this as a requirement? + * Maybe not at first, but we should support it within sigs.yaml + * Maybe also add projects under the /area label in GH + * Document Process for UG formation + * Support has been added for sigs.yaml + * PR open to add Big-Data to it + * No governance doc though + * Perhaps we also put geographic meetups under User groups as well? Governance efforts overlap. + * Ping Ihor re: CNCF and meetups + * Elections Meta-issue + * Prioritized because A) WE talked about it, B) It’s stale or C) We waited too long + * Let’s start now to address some of the concerns Contribex had in the 2018 election + * (Or should we leave as help-wanted or leave to discuss next time) + * Paris: Additional issue is updating and documenting good members of standing + * Funding and Budgeting + * Right now, CNCF Charter is kind of lacking in regards to other responsibilities across the projects. + * Lots of docs in flight. But Fund-requesting and budget processes need to be formalized and documented. + * Under a certain amount, file directly with service desk. Over, requires steering committee approval + * Seems like a solved problem, just not documented. + * What about funding things like automation and development (slack stuffs) + * Envoy project gave a TOC talk about the needs of a project, mirrors a lot of the pain points we’ve gone through. + * What material and support can the CNCF offer to support a project? We need to organize and lay out. + * Community Resource Management + * Having enough people in a content area that needs help + * How do we funnel execution priority for the project? + * We have a mechanism for this now, we just aren’t using it a lot yet: Role Boards + * Contribex has done a lot of work in this regards over the last several months. A lot of the work can be reused. + * Code of Conduct documentation + * Any thoughts? Likely leave it open for this milestone and discuss during the next meeting. + * Most of the onus on CoCC, documentation needs to be worked through. Charter first, docs next. + * Staffing gaps and conflict resolution + * The difference between people resources and tech resources + * Any action items we could possibly take? + * Evangelize best practices with regards to role definitions + * Sig-Contribex and Networking have been doing lots of role-building. Good model. + * Leaving open for now. + * Find homes for unowned areas of the project + * Does this need to be addressed in the near term? Or just find someone who can tackle. + * Some of those in the issue are already owned, list might not be as bad. + * Nearing critical mass, likely take off the milestone. + * 9 issues for the current milestone (May) + * [pwittrock] SC Charter Update + * PR: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/90](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/90) + * Authored By: + * Phillip Wittrock + * Approved By: + * (Pwittrock), Derekwaynecarr, Dims, Philips, Spiffxp, Timothysc + * Blocked On: + * 3 more approvals, or will hit lazy consensus next week + * Project Backlog + * [] [Document Working Groups](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/27) + * Owner: + * ? + * [pwittrock] Is this solved by Rationalize Governance? + * [] [SC Release Authority](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/86) - Done? + * [pwittrock] Will be resolved by the SC Charter Update item (under blocking) + * [] Review Code of Conduct + * Owner + * ? + * Status + * + * [] [Rationalize Governance](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1997) - Done? + * Authored By: + * Paris Pittman + * Reviewed By: + * Phillip Wittrock + * Brian Grant + * Arnaud M. + * Christoph Blecker + * PR Merged + * [] [Cleanup Audit of working Groups](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/83) + * + * [] [Charters Meta Issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31) + * Could the KSC please review [https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/75444](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/75444) either now or in a future meeting? + +## Feb 27, 2019 + +* Bosun: Aaron Crickenberger +* Note Taker: Josh Berkus +* Video: [https://youtu.be/TcX0MlglfzI](https://youtu.be/TcX0MlglfzI) +* [Zoom chat log](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zq6dmzC9hzj7bs43i09LddOdsUvOiT6lWPtu7qIpRN8/edit?usp=sharing) (steering-private@ write access, kubernetes-dev@ comment access) +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Phillip Wittrock, Aaron Crickenberger, Brian Grant (Google) + * Joe Beda, Tim St. Clair (VMware) + * Brandon Philips, Derek Carr (Red Hat) +* Observers + * Paris Pittman (Google) + * Josh Berkus (Red Hat) + * Jonathan Berkhahn (IBM) + * Bob Killen (University of Michigan) + * Jeffrey Sica (University of Michigan) + * Matt Baldwin (NetApp) + * Christoph Blecker +* Topics + * Kubernetes Slack Moderation [Jaice & Noah] + * Added more moderator guidelines and issue template. See all communication related docs [here](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/communication) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Nothing is blocked/waiting</span> + * - Decision to go through the board, then [talk about slack moderation](#bookmark=id.w06dhnn32gab) + * - Updating the Steering Committee charter: + * - there's a discussion issue + * - big question: can only the SC make requests of the CNCF, or can other people? especially for requests that require funding? + * - if there's a notification mechanism, we could authorize requests under a certain amount + * - further discussion on the issue, will follow up on the issue with wording + * - this does not need to be part of the SC charter + * - Rationalize Governance? + * - Paris submitted a PR, revised by Phil. + * - Are we making progress on rationalizing WGs? Some WGs are inactive or aren't really WGs. + * - Big data is the one in flight, being converted to a UG + * - In process of shutting down AppDevWG + * - Resource Mgmt WG is talking about shutting down and folding into SIG-Node + * - Charters meta-issue + * - Not all SIG charters have been fully reviewed and approved + * - SIG-Docs just closed + * - Most of them are done, but some need followup + * - Some need a 2nd charter due to changes + * - Cloud providers need to merge into SIG-CloudProvider + * - Updated SIGs diagram, showed examples and discussion + * - Slack Moderation + * - Noah & Jaice met with the End User community to see what the possibilities were for Slack + * - They don't feel that they can get enough new End User moderators to make enforcing CoC on Slack reasonable + * - we have the current moderators, and we're likely to burn them out + * - Recommendation: remove end users from the Slack, because we don't have another solution + * - Automation comes up as the defacto answer here, but such automation is high-maintenance, and we don't know who is going to maintain it. There's no current lead for this. + * - What about CNCF? CNCF does not offer moderation for their communities. Talked about motivating end user companies, but there's no really convincing way to do this. + * - What about pressuring Slack? Slack doesn't care, we are not using it the way they want us to. + * - Noah has looked into automation extensively, and doesn't think that he can make it CoC-compliant + * - What's the plan to make sure that contributor members are vetted? Noah suggested kicking everyone off and let people reregister based on the new inviter which uses github oauth, but Slack may not support this. Making a new Slack would be highly disruptive. + * - Jaice: human moderation doesn't scale well enough; even if we recruited 25 new moderators, that's 2000 members per moderator. We can't do it. + * - Joe suggested using the CNCF database to validate members. + * - Aaron raised the problems of segregating the community into devs and users, and will hurt contributor recruitment. Feels like we haven't actually tried to recruit moderators yet. And maybe safety isn't the only priority. + * - Paris: recruiting moderators is hard, because moderators require a certain attitude as well as quite a bit of training. I want to keep slack, but we can't keep it how it's being managed now. We have 9000 weekly active people, and 250 channels, + * - Josh: explained how moderation works on Discourse + * - Derek: nobody has to agree to the CoC to join slack has been pointed out, but bad actors don't care. Slack has been key to the project and its culture. + * - Brendan: let's separate the single incident from any systemic problems. It would be great to have data about whether or not there is a general problem. Slack will not help us, they don't care. How often are we kicking people off? A lot, but don't have numbers. + * - Paris: even before the incident, we didn't have enough moderators, and were unable to recruit enough moderators. There is a staffing issue. + * - Maybe we should have a KEP for "how do we reopen the doors". The first thing we need is 10 moderators. + * - Christoph: Contribex itself does not have the manpower for this. + * - Steering Committee will continue discussing this. They will create a group to work on this problem. + +## Feb 13, 2019 + +* Bosun: Brian Grant +* Note Taker: Josh Berkus +* Video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtbXVuV-TC4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtbXVuV-TC4) +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Phil, Sarah, Brian (Google) + * Brendan (Microsoft) + * Dims (Huawei) + * Joe, Tim (VMware) + * Clayton (Red Hat) +* Observers: + * Melvin Hillsman (Huawei) + * Jonathan Berkhahn, Mike Spreitzer, Rodrigo Dias (IBM) + * Josh Berkus, Sohan Kunkerkar (Red Hat) + * Paris Pittman, Kelsey Hightower (Google) + * Miquel Ortega (mashme.io) + * Noah Abrahams (Infosiftr) + * Tim Pepper, Stephen Augustus, Jorge Castro (VMware) + * Sam Briesemeister (Mesosphere) + * Elijah Oyekunle (Independent) + * Konstantinos Tsakalozos (Canonical) +* Topics: + * Check-in on GitHub project board - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * CNCF SIG(s) - how can we leverage them? + * [https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/194](https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/194) + * Community topics + * <add your topic/question here> + * Slack update [paris] + * [Joe] Regular review of CNCF funded efforts? + * monthly/quarterly review of funding + * github.com/cncf/servicedesk + * Regular meetings with CNCF staff? Perhaps schedule this as part of k8s steering public meeting? + * $$ figures +* Notes + * Brian suggests that the reason why they're opening the meeting was to get a wider number of contributors working on the issues directly in front of the steering committee. + * They recently inaugurated the concept of User Groups, which is like working groups but without specific technical code goals. Like the Big Data SIG might be converted to a User Group since they don't own code. + * Most [SIGs have charters in](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/31), at least the first version. SIG-Docs is still [working on theirs](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/3001). + * Next: document what working groups are and how to form and disband. This is mostly done. Need to add a sig-wg relationship section to sigs.yaml. There's a PR, but waiting on some SIGs. The SIG chairs have been asked to supply this information. + * https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/27 + * Formalize Subprojects: subprojects are created. What still needs to be done is to clean up ownership files and automate them around the defined subprojects. + * [Work on de-duping governance docs](https://docs.google.com/document/d/192ct2e2u_yjvhg_WD-96xBtmc-f8M_FMbt4OfA9vvN4/edit?usp=sharing) -> + * https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1997 + * There are a number of Working Groups that should be either disbanded because their work is done, or should be turned into subprojects. For example, Resource Mgmt WG reports that they are done. + * https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/83 + * Dims reported on the Licensing subproject. Looking for tools to help with license scanning. + * - (licensing) we need to make sure that all upstream licenses are on the whitelist, such as Apache2 and MIT. CNCF has updated the license whitelist. We're currently using the FOSSA scanning tool, which has the ability to have configurable policies for licenses, so we can take care of this. The SC tracking issue can be closed, ContribEx is taking care of it. License scanning should also probably be part of the release cycle. + * https://github.com/kubernetes/sig-release/issues/223 + * - A Bug Bounty is still in the TODO list, finding bug bounty vendors to launch one. Brian said that this is done. + * - Dims: The CNCF is creating SIGs. How does this affect Kubernetes? The CNCF TOC's workload for project reviews etc. has been steadily growing. They also created a landscape plan showing the gaps in the CN landscape, but that needs updating. So they want SIGs loosely modeled on the Kubernetes SIGs so that they can cover more ground. An initial set has been proposed. These SIGs are for areas that are out of scope for Kubernetes, like networking. Now they're probably moving up the stack to application deployment etc. Dims wants to know, which things are we obligated to attend? Also, are there SIGs where we can ask for help? The application-oriented SIG is probably the most obvious case; Matt Farina talked a bit about how Kubernetes SIG-Apps would relate to CNCF SIG-Apps. Matt really wants to make sure that there's not duplication of effort between the two (overlapping) groups. Additional discussion on cooperation ensued. + * - Brian and others talked about how other projects work with the CNCF, which is different from how Kubernetes does. Tim suggested that a public backlog tracking for the things we've asked for are happening, because right now we don't really know. Paris suggested that some of us attend the governing board meeting. There's also a meeting where the CNCF wants to make sure that Kubernetes feels adequately represented. Joe wants to make sure that spending priorities align with Kubernetes project priorities -- it will be easier to have public list without exact budget amounts. + * [https://github.com/cncf/servicedesk](https://github.com/cncf/servicedesk) + * Community / contrib-x update from Paris + * CNCF not providing moderators for Slack + * Slack doesn’t officially support open communities + * Our inviter is down due to the porn spam attack + * Some user support activity could be directed elsewhere, such as Discourse + * We have 60k people in slack currently + * - Paris reviewed the Slack vandalism incident from last Sunday, and the current status of Slack administration, such as that invites are still locked. They plan on asking some end user groups inside Kubernetes to see if we can get a lot more volunteer moderators, and then proceed from there. The CNCF will be offering some moderators for our mailing lists, but do not do Slack. Discussion on options for Slack, vs. moving to Discuss, ensued. + * Public SC meetings will be biweekly. They will take agenda items from the public in the future. SG-PM will help the SC trawl the backlog and that updates are prepared and the right external people are at the meeting. + +## Jan 30, 2019 + +* Bosun: Phil +* Note Taker: Phil +* Video: +* Attendees: + * Derek Carr, Clayton Coleman (Red Hat) + * Michelle, Brendan (Microsoft) + * Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock (Google) +* Topics: + * Public meeting - 2 weeks + * Send an email to k-dev or some group to notify folks + * Get folks to suggest agenda items, curate ahead of time + * Defer decision on making regular public meetings until we have done a few + * Can do every other meeting as public, do one-offs, etc + * User Groups (Brendan) + * Scope of Kubernetes + * Brian developing [documentation](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JZ6WQhBOecKViW_Fa6JMxV6jppy4ZhsJ-ULBCgH43mQ/edit?ts=5c479ea4#) around this + * Conversation of scope of the project goes in SIG ARCH + * Scope of a SIG within the project should be determined by SC + * Focus on creating balance within SC, not as much focus within SIGs + * SIG ARCH is the escalation path for most of the technical decisions people will object to + * TODO: Create a formalized escalation path + * Philosophical boundaries of a SIG and what it should be doing + * [Steering Charter](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/90/files) + * Code of Conduct Committee Charter + * LTS working group - lgtms required + * Require LGTMs from all sigs listed + * What is expectation of participation from sig if lgtm’ed - that ok with the discussion moving forward not that staffing or directly participating + * Goal of working group is not to ordain LTS but to explore release improvements + * Update working group governance to make clear the expectations of lgtm + * Going overboard: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * Bug Bounty + * Approve recommendation + * Kubernetes License Scanning + * Implications to the release + * Don’t have automation to enforce this - requires manual humans to do something + * File request on service desk to contract this being developed + * Enabling FOSSA - dims + * SIG release has subproject for this stuff now! + * Leadership expectations of Chairs - [hacker news](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19030607) + * Lets follow up on this +* AIs: + * SIG ARCH + * What is it + * What is its scope + * Reduce need for escalation and vigilance via documentation and education + * Scaling the project + * **_Need project management_** + * KEPs will help, but not there + * Can’t have folks just watching stuff flying through the releases + * More people on the project with more business or professional objectives + * How do we incentivize new companies onboarding to help carry the sustaining engineering of the project + * Hard to reason about all the changes now + +## Jan 16, 2019 + +* Bosun: Brian +* Note Taker: spiffxp / phillips +* Video: [https://youtu.be/KCtcAApnwCU](https://youtu.be/KCtcAApnwCU) +* Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock (Google) + * Derek Carr, Clayton Coleman, Brandon Philips (Red Hat) + * Dims (Huawei) + * Michelle, Brendan (Microsoft) +* Topics: + * Going over board: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1) + * SIG-BigData - Sig or working group or user group? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/sig-big-data](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/sig-big-data) + * Should it be under CNCF? They just need a place for discussion + * Is it similar to the machine learning working group? + * Bgrant: in favor of creating another type of group (e.g. BOF) + * Spiffxp: other types of SIGs that might be BOF are the single cloud provider SIGs + * Stclair: in cluster lifecycle the subprojects are able to get along just fine +* SIG Cloud + * Some of the older SIGs are a little unsure of the consolidation +* Consensus on SIG Cloud and BigData path forward + * Brendan AI: Create process for user groups or support groups + * [Add to existing governance doc](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/governance.md) + * Migrate BigData to the above group process + * If all goes well migrate SIG Cloud +* **AI: All steering committee members to review CoC charter** +* AI: All steering committee members review [Security Committee](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/89) +* Opening the steering meeting to more contributors + * AI: Brian will talk to Paris about moderating and get feedback about how to do it on the mailing list + * Done + * AI: ??? notify ??? list about the open steering committee meeting + * Things I forgot to file as issues [spiffxp] + * ~~Should WG approval be LGTMs or votes [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/FC7bblZLZ_I](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/FC7bblZLZ_I)~~ + * AI: all steering committee members to LGTM [the wg-k8s-infra charter](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/2830) + * ~~Codifying stakeholder SIGs for WGs ([a guess](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/2176#issuecomment-444623488) - turned into [a PR](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/3069))~~ + * I completely fell down on the job re: taking notes or summarizing followup / AIs from our private chat, Michelle has done some good work, maybe distill for next meeting? + * Product Security Team governance … committee? + * Security Audit - Please read the sanitized version of proposal + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/e23e90626db87ad9c2a85785d3e02fb67b5d4d64/wg-security-audit/Atredis%20and%20Trail%20of%20Bits%20Proposal.pdf](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/e23e90626db87ad9c2a85785d3e02fb67b5d4d64/wg-security-audit/Atredis%20and%20Trail%20of%20Bits%20Proposal.pdf) + * Q4 2018 Kubernetes media and velocity report - [ http://app.trendkite.com/report?id=5c4cf1c3-64ca-473a-a66b-081cb2f4299e](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/e23e90626db87ad9c2a85785d3e02fb67b5d4d64/wg-security-audit/Atredis%20and%20Trail%20of%20Bits%20Proposal.pdf) diff --git a/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2020-meeting-notes.md b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2020-meeting-notes.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..f6133f6c --- /dev/null +++ b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2020-meeting-notes.md @@ -0,0 +1,1068 @@ +## December 21, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: ~~Jordan Liggitt~~ +* Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * ~~Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr)~~ + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * ~~Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt)~~ + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * Meeting punted for async comms and reviews on outstanding items + +## December 7, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Derek Carr +* Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * ~~Christoph Blecker (@cblecker)~~ + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims)~~ + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Members of the Community: + * Ihor Dvoretskyi (CNCF) +* Topics: + * From election retro - This election did not improve the ethnic/gender diversity of SC. Is there anything we can reasonably do to encourage SC diversity without quo`tas? + * [paris] encourage role turnover in other areas that are feeder pools into steering + * [nikhita] also draft help in community-oriented work from people we think could be a good fit + * [bob] Want to make sure we don’t come off as “endorsing” or “grooming” for steering committee + * [Jordan] like the idea of identifying ways for community members to participate in steering projects to help the community and get visibility as a nice side-effect + * WG reports + * [paris] need at least 10 mins on this one + * in theory, we're rolling out the annual reports to all sigs in January, but might still need some adjustments after the WG trial run + * has been interviewing other community and end-users to get a sense for how other communities handle similar reports and what end-users find useful + * seeing patterns in incoming WG reports + * we want a clear picture of health/needs, we're getting minimal info in some responses + * reports tended to start more detailed and trail off as the doc went on; maybe consider putting the things we consider most necessary first in case writers run out of steam + * feedback from people filling out the reports was confusion/discomfort mixing the personal "you and your role" section into a public doc on the health of the WG; suggest limiting the doc to the SIG/WG bits, and have a 1:1 with SIG/WG leads and steering liaison to give feedback on personal involvement in the role (bandwidth, friction, support from community, etc) + * need example answers to questions to guide responses (level of detail, links to devstats/KEPs, etc) + * Kubernetes website notifications + * Operationalizing policy: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/communication/website-guidelines.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/communication/website-guidelines.md) + * Can we move this to /committee-steering in community? Or our steering repo in a new communications folder there? [paris] + * [Jordan/Bob] restructuring mechanics for website, right approvers/reviewers on the folder for pieces that went in website, and had a way to handle periods that a banner would run. + * Needs Review: + * Election retro followup - [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5326](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5326) + * Verify script to limit bio word count - [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5324](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5324) + * Update LF course for inclusive training - [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5328](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5328) + * CNCF Updates: + * Maintainers circle is starting soon - Dec 17th first meeting. All reviewers, approvers, subproject owners, and project decision makers (committees, etc) are invited!! Topics will include maintainer/leader topics like: burnout/managing time, managing during grief and loss, developing values and principles. + +## November 16, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Derek Carr +* Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * canceled to give back time after election retro same day + * 2020 Steering Committee Election Retro. Head to [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xLs1PLoPDXHZAgImNHTiepn_f7-k5HjsCZqaozgFLzI/edit?usp=sharing](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xLs1PLoPDXHZAgImNHTiepn_f7-k5HjsCZqaozgFLzI/edit?usp=sharing) for notes + * Join [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/kubernetes-dev](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/kubernetes-dev) or [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!forum/steering](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!forum/steering) for edit access. + +## November 2, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Derek Carr +* Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * **[private]** discuss memoriam for dan k. + +## October 26, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph Blecker +* Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) +* Topics: + * **[private]** Review [backlog](https://github.com/orgs/kubernetes/projects/40) with new members (from [onboarding checklist](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/180)) + * [liggitt] annual report workflow? + +## October 19, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph Blecker +* Note Taker: Dims +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * **[private]** Review [backlog](https://github.com/orgs/kubernetes/projects/40) with new members (from [onboarding checklist](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/180)) + * Discussion / background / context for new SC members on [term limits](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/127). + * [ACTION] freshen up the PR and merge it in + * [ACTION] Bosun to set up agenda for next public meeting especially retrospective for the election. + * WG Annual reports - need to wrap them up. + * Data protection needs attention + * [Action] set up issue tracking reports ready for review in order submitted to track completion and prioritize + * [nikhita] Doodle for new meeting time - [https://doodle.com/poll/yb55wman2r2bqx7n](https://doodle.com/poll/yb55wman2r2bqx7n) + * 2 west coasters are Paris and Christoph, so trying to do an earlier meeting. + * [paris/nikhita] Term limits for SC members - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/175](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/175) + * [nikhita] Documenting process for SIG leadership changes - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/179](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/179) + * [Bob] Password Manager ownership - [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3938](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3938) + * Multiple SIGs have requested some way of securely sharing credentials + * CNCF recommends keybase at this time, but it’s use for shared credentials is clunky (shared drives with text files) + * 1password allows any OSS project to use their service for free and looks to be ideal. + * Security concerns? + * Requires defining a group of owners - suggesting SC1/SC2/SC3 + +## October 12, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph Blecker +* Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Members of the Community: + * Alison Dowdney + * Stephen Augustus + * POP + * Heba Elayoty (@helayoty) + * Tabitha Sable + * Bob Killen + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Chris Short + * Jeffrey Sica (@jeefy) + * Kaslin Fields + * Carlos Panato + * Adolfo García Veytia (@puerco) + * Jordan Liggitt + * Celeste Horgan + * Wojtek Tyczynski + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) +* Topics: + * Election Results Announcement + * [nikhita] Scheduling an election retro + * WG Reliability Charter [Wojtek] + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5170](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5170) + * Action Items: + * Add note to special powers section to note that mechanics on merge blocking haven’t been decided, and will involve discussions/consensus with sig-testing and/or sig-release + * Add note to special powers section that it hasn’t been decided yet (and needs to be with sig-arch) what the scope for blocking is. (should it just be for conformance, or for things enabled by default? just for things in kubernetes/kubernetes?) + * Wojtek will update PR + * [paris/nikhita] Term limits for SC members - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/175](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/175) + * discussed giving new steering members time to get context and voting/closing on this in October 19th meeting + +## September 21, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph Blecker +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Lachie Evenson +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * **[private]** New chairs in sig-security + * Aarons last meeting :( + +## September 14, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Paris Pittman +* Note Taker: Aaron Crickenberger +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Members of the Community: + * Jorge Castro + * Ihor Dvoretskyi + * Aeva Black + * Josh Berkus +* Topics: + * KSC Election [officers?] + * Ballots go out today, will take 2 days to complete distribution + * Ballot announcement is tomorrow + * Would like to schedule a retro with members of steering, maybe during private meeting in october? + * Project to replace CIVS: https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5096 + * CNCF update + * [Rotating folks on GB Developer seat](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/178) + * Matt klein (cncf community) and michelle noorali (k8s) + * Michelle rotating out in december + * Cra talking about a chair + * Point is to get our act together by December + * Decide on a process, don’t have to have explicit instructions, could be vote on a call + * Don’t want to see a chair for steering committee that does double duty + * Asking a lot of maintainers + * Eg meet the maintainers, maintainer ama, + * High level discussion about reshaping that, maybe a CNCF contributor summit + * Steering session at KubeCon + * Most of us seemed +1 to skipping, lachie was against and willing to do leg work of getting session details together + * Dims if we do more interactivity vs a 1:1 talk + * Paris what if we teach something or do a retro? + * Dims: So we want to tell them yes but we’ll figure out what to do with the slot later? + * Christoph: technically the deadline was yesterday, concerns over taking a slot if we don’t have a plan + * Vote: aaron dims cblecker -1, nikhita lachie +1, derek paris 0 + * Derek: Don’t think we’ve reflected well enough on this + * Dims: we would be taking up a slot when other people get rejected + * Cblecker: if we come up with something I can be swayed + * Let’s revisit in 24 hours + * Working Group report wrap up + * Check in from members - + * Paris - wg data protection sent to steering-private@, wg security audit is turning down + * Derek - initiated [process](https://groups.google.com/g/kubernetes-wg-iot-edge/c/ceYk5jpv988/m/6yTVj0-sAwAJ) with iot and edge wg + * Nikhita - have reached out to wg-k8s-infra leads for filling the doc, will also talk about it in their meeting on Wednesday. + * Dims - wg-LTS is starting to wind down. + * Christoph - Component Standard in review. Still need to work with Policy. + * Aaron - wg-naming too new, wg-machine-learning retiring + * Lachie - update? Api-expression, multitenancy + * Prepare to review what we have by next private meeting? + * Review whether retired workgroups have actually retired by next private meeting + * Project board walk + +## August 31, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph Blecker +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Lahlan Evenson +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * Kubernetes Steering Election 2020 - Candidate -> Steering Q+A + * Steering Election candidate attendees + * Lachlan Evenson + * Stephen Augustus + * Divya Mohan + * Jordan Liggitt + * Bob Killen + * Mayank Kumar + * Federico Bongiovanni + * Questions + * What is something you wish you would have been told before starting in the role? (Jordan) + * What’s something that you had expected to have solved by now? (Stephen) + * What do you think is the most impactful change in 2020 that steering has made to the community? (Lachlan) + * What is something you’re proud of? What is something you wish you had done differently? What is something you would have liked to see? (Bob) + * What is one of the most challenging aspects of the work that is being done/has been done? (Divya) + * What’s next for the individuals on the steering committee? (Stephen) + * What is one decision you would change if you could? (Dims) + +## August 17, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Paris Pittman +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * **[private]**[cblecker] Kubernetes Podcast discussion [5 mins] + * **[private]**[nikhita] election stuff [5 mins] + * Line up retro; steering private and with election officers + * [nikhita] Should we hold a public SC meeting for Q+A with election candidates on 31st Aug? [<3 mins] + * Lets get a form for questions so we can get q’s ahead of time; lachie to take AI + * Include links like governance + * Keep focus on questions they have + * August has 5 Mondays, next public meeting is on 7th Sept but candidate bios are due on 8th Sept. + * [nikhita] SIG Security charter - any pending review thoughts? [5 mins] + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4962](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4962) + * [paris] do we have what we need to vote? + * [spiffxp] AMA prep [20-30 mins] + * [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1XeIxMnnOltlIX67Jem6DiQUSJWsrI5iXD0JT5vJ3bm8/edit#slide=id.p2](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1XeIxMnnOltlIX67Jem6DiQUSJWsrI5iXD0JT5vJ3bm8/edit#slide=id.p2) + * Platform usage recording - https://westucs.webex.com/recordingservice/sites/westucs/recording/play/660fbea1ed8a41639088dc23cf75704a + * [nikhita/paris] Term limits for steering - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/175](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/175) + * Less than a year - use instead of partial + * Retro to 1st full 2 year term cycles; bootstrap doesnt count + * Mailing list vote + * Look at changes.md + * [nikhita] slack-infra contractor update - discussed with Bob. We don’t need a contractor for now. Will reach out Priyanka if steering is ok with this. + +## August 3, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Nikhita Raghunath +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Lachlan Evenson +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * ~~Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp)~~ (had a schedule conflict) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Members of the Community present: + * Jay Beale + * Joel Smith + * Seth Jennings + * Craig Ingram + * Aaron Small + * Lubomir Ivanov + * Tim Allclair + * Ihor Dvoretskyi + * Gaurav Singh +* Topics: + * [cblecker] 2020 election schedule + * [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/1lRWHGbExe8/m/jLdf6Nr5BwAJ](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/1lRWHGbExe8/m/jLdf6Nr5BwAJ) + * Compiling list of electors + * 50 contributions + * Member of Kubernetes of Kubernetes SIGs orgs in GH + * [nikhita] Questions on dates: + * Election Begins: September 11 -> this is a Friday. Can it be a Monday to ensure that it’s on everyone’s radar? + * Announce Results: October 9 -> this is a Friday. Can it be a SC meeting or community meeting? Oct 5 is a Monday with the public SC meeting. Can we move the dates earlier by a week? + * Should new member announcements be held at the steering committee meeting (Either 5 or the 19th of October). Could it be moved a week earlier? Or move it a few days ahead to align with steering committee meeting @christoph and nikhita (ended up being October 12th) + * Should voting open up on a Monday or Tuesday rather than a Friday? Preference for a Tuesday so that inboxes are “cleaner” @christoph + * [ACTION ITEM] Confirm with election officers to open up voting on a Tuesday and can the results be announced at a public steering meeting + * [jaybeale] sig-security proposal + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4976](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4976) and + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4962/](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4962/files) + * Jay Beale presented proposal and shared the problem space and the community interest (see recording) + * Also add an authoritative endpoint for press and ecosystem to interact with regarding Kubernetes security + * For historical context, we're folding the wg-security-process proposal into this sig-security proposal: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BnCG_JopFD-XRZKPQjNHrG26G8V6dGC_enCnHw_v5bI/edit](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BnCG_JopFD-XRZKPQjNHrG26G8V6dGC_enCnHw_v5bI/edit) @Tim Allclair + * Questions + * Why a new sig versus a subproject of an existing sig? @Derek Carr + * A single entrypoint for infosec community members to discover + * What responsibilities is it taking over from the PSC (or are you saying that those responsibilities weren’t previously held by the PSC? @Derek Carr + * PSC would like more involvement from the community eg. guidelines, response times. Current process is based on little feedback and what works for the PSC but would like feedback from community for how the process works and can be made better @Tim Allclair + * RE: responsibilities - hand-off might not be the right words as both the SIG and PSC are made up of many of the same folks. Basically everything that needs to be public. PSC is the private forum and SIG Security is the public forum. In the case of an embargoed vulnerability PSC would hand over to SIG Security once the embargo is lifted. @Tim Allclair + * What were some of the obstacles that you’ve hit so far and how were you able to navigate? @Dims + * Tangible example - If SIG Security is asked on guidance for deprecating PSP with OPA or Gatekeeper. What’s going to happen? @Dims + * Is there anyone else in the community that you have engaged with to see how this might affect them? @Christoph + * Also had a conversation with contribex and SIG docs which resulted in the crafting of the charter/proposal @Jay Beale + * What about the CI for the security fork (as it has been neglected)? @Christoph + * See an opportunity to build trust via associates and onboarding community members + * How can we help you? @Dims + * AI: Steering to review Proposal PR and move toward lgtm + * [christoph] Sent mail to Josh + * [nikhita] Adding liaisons for committees - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/170](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/170) + * [nikhita] Should SIGs do annual reports for WGs in 2021? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/172](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/172) + * [paris] how are wg annual reports coming along? + * Im reviewing data protections and wg sec audit would like to fold into the newly proposed sig + * Iot edge - will most likely come in september + * Component standard - sent to steering private + * Policy - engaged; need to follow up + * Multi Tenancy - lachie working with them on questions + * [paris/ihor] cncf update + * What's going on with the wider cncf community? + * Discussions of mutil-org requirements in Contribex + * Governance badging. “Steering committee” yes, “multi-org” yes badges etc… + * Minikube funding (AWS credits) @Dims. + * Ihor is tracking it + * Google funding grant will finish July 2021 + * AI: Steering to follow up on actions with Priyanka + * [paris] [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/174](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/174)- **FYI ONLY** + * Adding past election officers + * No review needed; just FYI + +## July 27, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Nikhita Raghunath +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Lachlan Evenson +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * [**private**][nikhita] k3s meeting with the CNCF TOC + * [**private**][nikhita] CoCC election next steps + * [nikhita] KubeCon slides due next week (Aug 4th) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/154#issuecomment-652567722](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/154#issuecomment-652567722) + * AI: Lachie to create slides + * [nikhita] SC election - deciding criteria for members of standing + * Suggestion from Bob and Jorge - >= 50 contributions on devstats AND a kubernetes/k-sigs/k-csi/k-client github org member + * SC came to consensus via voting in the meeting + * [nikhita] Reminder to follow up on your AIs from our meeting with Priyanka :) + * [nikhita] Adding liaisons for committees - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/170](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/170) + * To be discussed in the next meeting + * [nikhita] Should SIGs do annual reports for WGs in 2021? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/172](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/172) + * To be discussed in the next meeting + +## July 6, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Lachlan Evenson +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Paris Pittman (@paris) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Dims (@dims) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Members of the Community present: + * Ihor Dvoretskyi (CNCF) + * Nilson Ferreira (@nfsouzaj) + * Florin Moraru (@klusht) +* Topics: + * [cblecker] Election officers for 2020 have been nominated + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/161#issuecomment-650314364](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/161#issuecomment-650314364) + * Call vote to ratify these + * [lachie83] + * Organize Code of Conduct Committee Elections for seats ending Aug 7, 2020 (3) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/committee-code-of-conduct#term-ends-on-august-7-2020](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/committee-code-of-conduct#term-ends-on-august-7-2020) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-code-of-conduct/election.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-code-of-conduct/election.md) + * [paris] [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/169](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/169) + * Discuss how we nominate candidates + * Nikhita: how have we done it in the past? + * Where do the nominations go? + * We used a Google form in the past + * Michelle sent the results from the form to steering-private@ + * Christoph: Okay to open up the nominations. + * Paris: should we invite cocc to next private meeting? + * Christoph: concern is timeline + * Nikhita: could we do this as a one off? Lachie: do this with a subgroup? + * Paris and Lachie will pick this up and consult with CoCC, bring back to group and proceed + * Paris: do a PR to correct the process to allow nomination from more than [leads@kubernetes.io](mailto:leads@kubernetes.io)? + * No change to eligibility for voting + * [nikhita] Request for gsuite groups (from jorge and bob): + * [calendar@kubernetes.io](mailto:calendar@kubernetes.io) - [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/166](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/166) + * What we use right now is this super random string that corresponds to a shared calendar + * Anyone anywhere on the internet can invite this shared calendar + * So we want to have a more constrained calendar that could be invited + * Can’t use contributors@ because it has elevated access + * [sig-foo-leads@kubernetes.io](mailto:sig-foo-leads@kubernetes.io) - issue yet to be created, wanted quick feedback first + * In the past we’ve tried not to create too many gsuite accounts + * A bunch of the leads mailing lists have gotten stale and we can’t access them + * So what if we used a gsuite account for each of these + * Nikhita created a PR to start sharding up groups.yaml file + * Meta point: + * Steering doesn’t need to be involved with these sorts of decisions + * Steering needs to be pinged for primary account creation but not much else + * Nikhita will take up documenting this policy going forward + * [nikhita] Please review [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4874](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4874) + * Updates policy for community groups update from quarterly to once a year, matches current reality + * Paris: One community meeting update, one k-dev update, one annual report update + * Aaron: Concern over doing three different things vs. the same thing N different times, feels like more work? Will just send a slide deck to k-dev vs. presenting it at community + * [nikhita] Assigning a SC liaison for WG Naming + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/168](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/168) + * Aaron: I will take this + * [nikhita] Time to kick off Annual Reports? + * [paris] kdev email needs to go out and be shaped [https://hackmd.io/jpZOM7RJRJOTPsxDsHmS_Q](https://hackmd.io/jpZOM7RJRJOTPsxDsHmS_Q) - need this reviewed by steering + * [paris] [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4874](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4874) - this is kind of dependant on the sig process and official annual reports kicking off + * Jorge and I worked on a loose schedule [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1adztrJ05mQ_cjatYSnvyiy85KjuI6-GuXsRsP-T2R3k/edit?pli=1#gid=932627810](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1adztrJ05mQ_cjatYSnvyiy85KjuI6-GuXsRsP-T2R3k/edit?pli=1#gid=932627810) + * Tldr - there is current community debt here with folks doing double work so want to make a smooth schedule that takes into account the new annual report requirement + * [paris] [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4902](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4902) - wg process PR needs approval - need this reviewed by steering + * [nikhita] Route the “Kubernetes starter kit for Openstack” email to sig-arch for review? + * [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/VGjECFmk-cQ](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/VGjECFmk-cQ) + * Dims: +1 route to sig arch, would also be good to chat but that’s a side issue + * Dims: probably should check in with cluster api provider and cloud provider subprojects + * Dims: will handle replying to this e-mail and cc’ing in the appropriate SIGs + * [nikhita] FYI the CNCF TOC has a new proposal for "Steering Committee Charters" for CNCF Projects. + * toc email thread - [https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4893](https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4893) + * proposal - [https://docs.google.com/document/d/11Hiz1dGYRS7GcjedpRVnSlDjIj0AVjeTa0-Td7aW-Lk/edit](https://docs.google.com/document/d/11Hiz1dGYRS7GcjedpRVnSlDjIj0AVjeTa0-Td7aW-Lk/edit) + * Nikhita: would be good to take a look at this if you’re interested + * [paris] can we have a cncf update/discussion section for every steering meeting? + * aaron: given that paris is part of the Contributor Strategy SIG and is involved over there, make sense for paris to lead this? + * Paris: eg: conversation around criteria for sandbox/incubating/graduating + * Dims: doc dims saw was more from alexis rather than a statement from the TOC? + * Dims: how much do we need to pay attention to this? + * Christoph: good to have an ear to the ground for what’s coming from the CNCF, eg. what helpful stuff could we adopt, could be knowledge that we have to contribute back as the first graduated project, seems like pace of things is picking up to the point where I’m having trouble keeping up + * Dims: one issue I have is that we haven’t heard back on things that we were looped in on + * Paris: think this is a comms problem between us and cncf, now that I am active/engaged in cncf community have definitely seen there is a lack of communication between projects, we can’t see outside of the bubble, outside of the bubble is growing a lot + * Paris: adding dedicated time to this meeting would help engage our community with that + * Christoph: michelle was our toc liason (is?) and we’re missing some of that + * Dims: so should we be asking our toc liason to show up here? From the toc side there is supposed to be a person, let’s see if we can get that conversation going through our representative; for the GB, we have Lachlan, and we have Ihor + * Christoph: regardless think the idea of having a standing agenda item for CNCF would be beneficial + * Dims: it’s just that we usually have a packed agenda, if there’s nothing specific to talk about, we may fill it up… if there’s nothing actionable, does it need to be on the agenda? + * Lachlan: summary paris is going to be responsible at this point for having a place to give updates on happenings at CNCF, due to her role as SIG Contrib Strat chair, if there’s nothing in the agenda, then we’re not going to use it… will give 5-10min slot + * Lachlan: will update bosun policy to include this (will try to break it up into 9 commits and 8 rebases) + * [nikhita] Follow up from previous meeting, what do we think about “Unconscious bias training for SIG chairs/leads”? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3724](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3724) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3662](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3662) + * Is pushing deadline of end of year for existing leads too long? + * Dims: I’m fine saying we should just mandate and see what comes of it? I mean do we have sticks or carrots in this regard? + * Christoph: supportive if we have more ideas to be creative, but at very least this is a step in the right direction, would suggest shorter than end of year + * Aaron: your sig can’t land enhancements in 1.20 unless your leads have taken the training? + * Christoph: 45 days? 90 days sounds too long, 30 minutes is not a lot + * Dims: tie to a date, eg: 1.19 release date, or kubecon? + * Christoph: now there’s crunch time competition + * Lachlan: what if we had sigs add a badge or something? + * Dims: what if had a branded facemask for taking it + * Lachlan: to wrap a bow, what are the actions we need to take, who’s going to own them + * Nikhita: have concerns around shipping swag for training, something people should take, not just because swag + * Aaron: use chairs/tech-leads meeting to roll out, check in? + * Christoph: send e-mail to [leads@kubernetes.io](mailto:leads@kubernetes.io)? Christoph can take on writing e-mail to roll this out if someone else can evangelize at meeting + * Nikhita: track using umbrella issue? General thumbs up to this + +## June 15, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Lachlan Evenson +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Christoph Blecker +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Lachlan Evenson + * Dims + * Nikhita Raghunath + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Apologies + * Derek Carr +* Members of the Community present: + * N/A +* Topics: + * [lachie] KubeCon EU AMA session - 5:10pm CEST (8:10am US Pacific) Wednesday, August 19 + * Training from Nanci on the virtual platform + * 2-3 slides to introduce the committee and what we do. Lachie on point for slides. + * [lachie] SC Group liaisons update (Lachie) + * [christoph] The assignments need to be PRd somewhere - sigs.yaml? + * [Dims] keep in separate for now + * [Christoph] Will place it in the steering repo for now + * [lachie] The way we discuss control plane members - [ML link](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/kubernetes-sig-cluster-lifecycle/IjN_9n0KEUg/k-4abo19AgAJ) + * [lachie] Do we as steering need to do anything here? + * [lachie] Should we have common, standard language across the project? + * [dims] APIs and code will need to go through sig arch + * [christoph] explicitly not steering’s call to make technical decisions + * [christoph] sig-arch meeting on thursday to discuss it + * [christoph] talk of new working group being formed to tackle + * [lachie] sig arch responsible for documentation? Where would they locate it? + * [paris] ready to make this happen. Will take steering hat off, and attend sig-arch, new working group + * [dims] we need to know where to actually make changes + * [christoph] may not be a straight find/replace.. May need input from SMEs in sig arch type setting + * [nikhita] Did we finalize how we want to proceed with the kubernetes.io Twitter account? + * [nikhita] 2 contribex folks and 2 steering members + * [paris] contributor marketing team in contribex will be eventual owner + * [lachie] steering will be a moderating function + * Paris will send list of folks to the CNCF + * [nikhita] Unconscious bias training for SIG chairs/leads? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3724](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3724) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3662](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3662) + * [nikhita] should we look at actually rolling this out (either the LF free online course, or the more in-depth Sage Sharp course) + * [christoph] LF unconscious bias training is free and takes about 30 minutes. Sage Sharp course is more of a commitment + * [dims] Concerns about making this another forced commitment when folks are busy and stretched thin + * [nikhita] Do we make this mandatory within 30 days for new chairs/TLs, but then give existing leads to the end of the year? + * [christoph] This is exactly the time to do this. Important for leaders in all the sigs to have that super basic baseline knowledge + * [lachie] should we shorten the timeline? Folks will probably wait till the deadline to do anyways + * [dims] can we be more creative in how we roll this out? + * [paris] implementation of working group annual reports + * We’ve got our working group assignments - now what? Are we going to one of their meetings? Are we setting up time with their organizers? + * Go to their meetings, introduce yourself, describe why you are there (better communication and annual report) + * [paris] will share template with team + * [nikhita] Are we going to go 30 days from the time you attend the meeting + * [Dims] Do we need to roll this out via the community meeting or mailing list + * [paris] k-dev e-mail + * [christoph] Re: 30 day timeline is not strict. Frame it as, 30 days but if you need longer let us know. + * [paris] New issues in steering repo to follow up on any questions regarding healthcheck process + * Walk through [project board](https://github.com/orgs/kubernetes/projects/40) + +## June 1, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Nikhita Raghunath +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Aaron Crickenberger +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Members of the Community present: + * +* Topics: + * Steering Election Officers for 2020 Election (@lachie83) - [issues/161](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/161) + * Need to build the team of election officers + * Looking to expand the pool of election officers and would like to consider existing steering members + * Document existing members in the policy doc + * Lachie: had a convo with christoph about this, would like to re-run for the upcoming election, so cannot volunteer for election officer + * Christoph: typically the mechanics of running the election, what is needed from us + * Ihor: jorge, mrbobbytables and ihor were officers last year; typically one person steps down, and one new person steps in for rotation purposes + * lachie: could ask former / retiring steering members? + * spiffxp: technically we don’t have to choose officers until end of july + * cblecker: since I’m sitting through this election I can volunteer as an election officer + * Paris: shouldn’t this be done through contribex? Policy langauge should be changed to say contribex brings candidates to steering by july 1 + * cblecker: I will take care of executing policy for the current election cycle + * Nikhita: updating criteria for members of standing? + * Cblecker: do we want to put member of standing criteria in contribex’s hands? + * Nikhita: if we update the member of standing criteria to be a little more strict, it would be easier, and it might make less work for election officers? + * Aaron: nikhita and I will follow up with mrbobbytables on election criteria for next meeting + * Funding (@dims): + * CNCF already budgeted for kubernetes audit (DONE) + * Minikube request for AWS credits + * Digital Ocean credits for cluster-provider-do (DONE) + * Dims: chris and ihor helped line up DO credits, ihor confirms receipt of first DO invoice + * Dims: audit is already budgeted for (same amount as last time) it’s now up to audit wg to select and execute + * Dims: minikube wants to do something different because of testing they need to do on windows, they need AWS credits + * Ihor: I have a few questions + * Dims: this isn’t for general testing, this is for specific testing, only a few scenarios on AWS, on windows; we can’t use prow and we can’t use other providers + * Ihor: to clarify why questions, we have a good number of AWS credits but they are limited, so we could also offer bare metal + * Dims: typically asks why the current options don’t work + * Aaron: why not prow? + * Dims: want to use their existing harness, aren’t starting from scratch, want a pull vs push mechanism + * Dims: will file service desk ticket and work with ihor from there + * Other + * Dims: thanks to dan kohn, welcome to priyanka on cncf + * Paris: wanted to talk about steering committee liasons with community groups to potentially roll out community group reporting for just the working groups + * Walk through [project board](https://github.com/orgs/kubernetes/projects/40) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4755](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4755) - aaron to draft PR against sig-arch to own upgrade/downgrade policy + * Paris: Are community group liasons required for us to move on working group reports? How should we launch for working group report? + * Paris: some other open ended questions around timeline and such + * Aaron: asking for google doc template of questions I will have to answer as working group organizer + * Derek: trying to think through the fact that sigs own code and working groups don’t, are there any outliers + * Dims: k8s-infra and multi-tenancy wg both have repositories + * Derek: not sure how much bi-directional reporting is done (dims agress this definitely needs to be addressed) + * Paris: How long do we give? 30 days? 60, 90? + * General sentiment that people will wait until the last minute regardless of the amount of time + * Derek: it’s easy to mistake that members of a wg have this as their dominant activity when it could be their 10% + * Paris: steering liasons could help out as well + * General consensus that 30 days is enough, from the time the liason presents the doc + * Paris: I will type this up and PR this in + * Aaron: stagger this? Do this all at once? Concerns of handling 10 WG responses at once + * Dims: we say 4 weeks, this is probably going to take 6 weeks + * Nikhita: timeline for when we start reaching out? Ready to launch by next committee meeting? + * Dims: so what do we do with all of these as a body? + * Paris: consider having these submitted as a PR after review? Into their directory in community? Talk through in chairs and tech leads meeting in august? + * Dims: thinking of a return from us that reflects the health in aggregate? Maybe a blog post? + * Paris: still seems like we’re lacking an answer to what we need to effectively coach but we can try to use this as an experience to learn from + * Kubecon EU? + * Cblecker: seems like it’s less useful to do this virtually, because we already have a lot of virtual spaces where people are free to ask us + * Lachie: thinks this would be more like a CNCF webinar where we would moderate chat while a prerecorded session is happening + * Paris: thinks Chris A did this for TOC and it went well, a brief intro + * Lachie: I’m happy to do this in the context of we’re gonna have to find out what the virtual platform is sooner than later + * Nikhita: +1 and can help lachie + * Community groups + * Cblecker: have a spreadsheet we’ll run through + * Paris: should we choose groups we’re active in? Not active in? + * Derek: what if we just randomize? (general consent) + * Cblecker: may need to resolve SIGs with overlapping meetings + * Next bosun + * Lachie + +## May 18, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Nikhita Raghunath +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Members of the Community present: + * N/A +* Topics: + * Steering Election Officers for 2020 Election (@lachie83) - [issues/161](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/161) + * Need to build the team of election officers + * Looking to expand the pool of election officers and would like to consider existing steering members + * Document existing members in the policy doc + * [nikhita]: moved to next meeting due to lack of time for discussing it + * K3s inclusion into CNCF sandbox (lachie83) - [https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/447](https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/447) + +## May 4, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Nikhita Raghunath +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Lachlan Evenson +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Members of the Community present: + * Ihor (CNCF) +* Topics: + * Welcome Lachie!!! (first public SC meeting!!) + * [nikhita] Community Health check updates from breakout discussion + * Steering WG met last week to discuss: + * Concerns about making another meeting/survey/form. We would like to lead with what the leads/chairs get out of this (the value). + * Provide opportunity for lead/chair coaching. + * Discussed the idea of this becoming part of an annual report for SIGs. + * Also discussed private items between chairs/leads with steering. Paris has updated the PR that private items will be added to a single report. Current PR language is one report. Need consensus across steering. + * Christoph mentioned that we could potentially use the liaison in addition to the single report. + * [nikhita] [Community health check PR](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4687) **<span style="text-decoration:underline;">(needs review)</span>** + * Thanks Paris!! + * Outstanding question on how we do 2020 reports or wait until 2021. + * Suggestion: making this optional in 2020 to test the process (Dims) + * Suggestion: Make the WGs required first to get a pulse (Paris) + * Concern about the waiting to get the pulse and potentially provide a longer time to get the response (Christoph) + * Suggestion: SIG liaison to work on the report with the WG together to see if it’s possible. (Paris) + * Concerns regarding scaling + * RECAP + * Mandatory for WGs + * SIGs can optionally submit reports + * SIG liaisons will be appointed + * [cblecker] [Steering liaison to SIGs](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/159) + * Point-of-contact to facilitate communication + * Last time steering committee liaisons were appointed for SIG/WG charters + * Also help be an extra set of eyes in the case that chairs are also steering members + * Is this active/passive + * Active - specific work + * Passive - questions, coaching, when asked + * Where should it go? + * Communication out to SIGs/WGs + * Assignments + * If you have one sig, you should take their wgs too - that could make it easier + * [Updates on DO account for e2e testing](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/9) + * [nikhita] Dims has [created](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/9#issuecomment-622614406) the service desk ticket, CNCF said that they’ll talk to DO and come back with a response by EOW. + * [Ihor] We’ve started discussing this question with DO, please expect an update from us later. + * CNCF happy to cover in the case that there isn’t DO credits [Ihor] + * [paris] [Defining and scoping the term “member”](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/160) + * Aim to get a canonical definition of the term “member” + * Membership is often scoped for the purpose ot the document that it’s in + * Elections gets a dump from devstats with a GH handle with 50+ contributions in the last year + * The 50+ contributions number comes from steering + * Members of standing + * How many voters? (Bob Killen) + * Last election numbers: 879 of 602 were org members (277 were not) + * 377 of the pool voted + * 211 of those weren’t following k/dev ML + * Detach community member for Github org membership + * Lead verbiage change will be PRd to the handbook + * + * [Chair role handbook PR](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4716) **<span style="text-decoration:underline;">(needs review)</span>** + * [SIG Cluster Lifecycle charter changes](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/fBcF3puFEkI) **<span style="text-decoration:underline;">(needs review)</span>** + * [dims/ihor] [Travel sponsorship discussion](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/114) + * Issue can be closed. Dims will connect with Ihor offline + * [nikhita] [Discussion topics meta issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/51) + * Can we close this? It isn’t particularly actionable. Folks can reopen with granular issues if there are specific concerns. + * These may be important however they are not urgent so we’re not going to deal with them now + * Walk through [project board](https://github.com/orgs/kubernetes/projects/40) + * Choose next bosun + * nikhita + +## April 27, 2020 [discussion session] + +Notes: +* What’s it in for chairs? What happens if there is no update? Lead with the advantages + * What can we as steering list as things that we can help with? +* How can we help them scale? + * Help with advising on roles; could we provide coaching? privately? +* Should we call it something like ‘the annual report for your community group’ + * We can take this seriously + * Build trust + +## April 20, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Aaron Crickenberger +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Christoph +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Lachlan Evenson (@lachie83) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Members of the Community present: + * N/A +* Topics: + * Invite CoCC to next private meeting (5/18) for check in with Steering + * Welcome, Lachie!!! + * [Community Health Check / Roll Call](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/153) - paris + * WIP PR: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4687](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4687) + * Open questions + * What is the timeline for 2020? + * Where do the SIGs give their reports/follow up discussions? + * What is the process for Steering review of healthcheck? + * What format do we accept the reports in? + * Do we follow the 4-week process in changes.md? + * Breakout discussion with Paris/Christoph/Dims/Lachie + * [Appropriate use of upstream marketing twitter for KEPs](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4516) - paris + * Nikhita has a comment and it will be merged in + * [DigitalOcean account for e2e testing](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/156) - cblecker + * Need to get instance sizing information from Marko, and then can open up service desk ticket + * [Kubernetes.io gsuite account for billing reports](https://github.com/kubernetes/k8s.io/issues/509) - nikhita + * From wg-k8s-infra [meeting on 1 April 2020](https://docs.google.com/document/d/16VBfsFMynA7tObzuZGPpw-sKDKfFc_T5W_E4IeEIaOQ/edit#heading=h.3dxstksmwe59), there was an ask for a kubernetes.io gsuite account for managing billing report access. We would need a gsuite account to act as an owner, google groups can’t own docs. + * Steering is okay with moving ahead with this. + * [Kubernetes.io gsuite account for sig chairs/TLs group](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4673) - nikhita + * Steering is okay with moving ahead with this. + * wg-k8s-infra needs to look at changes for long term sustainability as we add new lists to the k8s.io gsuite + * [Adding “point of contact” for subprojects in sigs.yaml](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4445) - nikhita + * What is the difference between this and subproject owners? + * Should we just import the subproject owners? + * We should go back to the originator and get more details on the original ask + * [Prune/shuffle projects under kubernetes org](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/136) - nikhita + * What input do we need from steering here? Can GitHub Admin Team start tackling this? + * Choose next Bosun + * Nikhita will do this + +## April 6, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Aaron Crickenberger +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Aaron Crickenberger +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Tim St. Clair (@timothysc) +* Members of the Community present: + * Ihor Dvoretskyi (CNCF) + * Josh Berkus + * Rémy Léone (Scaleway) + * Bob Killen (University of Michigan) + * Tim Pepper +* Topics: + * [Nikhita/Remy] [Contributor Bill of Rights issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4617) + * Also [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4615](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4615) + * [remy] Wants it to be very clear what a new contributor can expect + * [remy] Trying to think about what are the different rights, the CLA seems to make things very explicit, why don’t we have that kind of language for contributor’s rights + * [paris] [https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/expectations.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/guide/expectations.md) + * Can this be more explicit? And maybe linked “higher” in the contributor guide? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/community-membership.md#responsibilities-and-privileges-1](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/community-membership.md#responsibilities-and-privileges-1) + * “Expected to be responsive to review requests as per [community expectations](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/guide/expectations.md)” + * [dims] this relates to roles and responsibilities of people in OWNERS files and the enforcement of them being adhered to + * [derek] is there an example of an existing community that is doing this well? + * [remy] c4 is an example [https://rfc.zeromq.org/spec/42/](https://rfc.zeromq.org/spec/42/); Contributions are accepted right away, but community may revert + * [remy] Not saying this is the right fit for the kubernetes project + * [derek] What is contribution in this context? There is more than code + * [dims] Apache does commit-then-review, there is a spectrum, but we’ve always followed review-then-commit for a variety of reasons here + * [remy] Not asking for extra rights, just want to bootstrap effort of what a contributor can expect at every level of their engagement. Could be a very minimal set of rights. Want to lay bare minimum of what a contributor can expect (in all sigs?) + * [Paris] [K8s Contributor Twitter Account](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/forum/#!topic/steering/Rdf82UV9D84) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4516](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4516) + * Are we OK with: sig-contribex owning the operation and guidelines of this twitter account under the community-management subproject and + * Are we OK with: this account being under one of the controlled gsuite accounts and not an individual's email + * [tim] what is scope of this? + * [paris] solely contributors, not end-users, not anything that would show on kubernetesio twitter account + * [tim] concern over vendors attempting to monetize etc. + * [paris] made sure to include ethos inside [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/communication/marketing-team/social-guidelines.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/communication/marketing-team/social-guidelines.md) + * [paris] goal is to aid flow of information, tell stories based on what we do + * [derek] worry about twitter being used as a bully pulpit for KEPs + * [paris] eg: when we need more feedback / larger feedback on KEPs + * [derek] concern about being used to raise / resolve disagreement within KEPs + * [bob] eg: think user feedback on things that are alpha + * [dims] just for KEPs maybe let’s do it only when they’ve been approved + * If the author asks for feedback, we should talk to the people who have been assigned as approvers to the KEP to confirm if that’s OK + * [paris] created a contributor-comms label so people can flag us on things + * [Aaron] [Retire Resource Management](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4157) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/wg-resource-management](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/wg-resource-management) + * [Christoph] Confirm closure of [unconscious bias training](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/132) issue + * [Christoph] Request for [DO account for e2e testing](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/156) + * [Ihor] CNCF doesn’t have the credits agreement with DO yet. Please raise the request via the CNCF ServiceDesk with the approximate credits budget and we’ll proceed with the negotiations further. + * AI: christoph to create service desk ticket + * [Aaron] [Create WG API Expression](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4655) + * AI: aaron to send PR to steering mailing list, call for vote + * [Paris] [Community Health Check / Roll Call](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/153) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4687/files](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4687/files) + * [dims] how do we know the membership of a given sig? + * [dims] the way it works in apache, anyone in the sig could respond to this, whereas here we’re tacking on additional work to the chair role, work that chairs haven’t had to historically do + * [dims] would like to strengthen what it means to be a part of a given SIG + * [dims] eg: people who are part of the kubernetes org now feel a part of the kubernetes community, could we do something similar for sigs? + * [paris] do you want us to ask the chairs how they are explicitly measuring membership? Should we mandate membership? + * [dims] ask leads what they would like in terms of support from us (paris: we have three questions related to this) + * [tim] I would reverse some of this, the order of the asks are less supportive and more dictatorial when youre reading them. I understand the purpose and intent, but what are we really trying to do here, what’s the endgame. How can we better serve them + * [paris] I have a lot of the why etc. not in this PR + * [tim] reality is everyone who is in a chair role today is in a similar position of struggling to scale and handle all existing responsibilities, they are looking for help but don’t know how/where/why + * [tim] think it’s import we outline intent before getting to questions + * [christoph] at least half of the intent is to know whether people are there / alive, be a little more process oriented, are you healthy are you meeting, directed at the chairs + * [Group] Who is the next bosun? + * Aaron: to PR in changes to the guide + +## March 16, 2020 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph Blecker +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Christoph Blecker +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Christoph Blecker + * Paris Pittman + * Aaron Crickenberger + * Davanum Srinivas + * Nikhita Raghunath +* Members of the Community present: + * N/A +* Topics: + * KEP for [third-party and dual-sourced content](https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/pull/1327#issuecomment-582164066) + * [Bosun Guide and Script](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1u6quWaMm1nRXJERlerZI8DcveBI0bpBx4bXORUOLHtE/edit) + * Aaron to be next bosun + * sig-autoscaling chair responsiveness + * [Roll call issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/153) + +## March 2, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Paris Pittman +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Christoph Blecker + * Paris Pittman + * Aaron Crickenberger + * Tim St. Clair + * Nikhita Raghunath +* Members of the Community present: + * Jeffrey Sica + * Bob Killen + * Mo Khan +* Topics: + * [Zach C.] KEP for [third-party and dual-sourced content](https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/pull/1327#issuecomment-582164066) //[note from paris: need to check with Zach if this topic is still good] 10 mins + * How does “implementable” apply to docs? + * How should we resolve author/reviewer/editor TBDs? + * What’s necessary to move this KEP forward? + * Sig arch should be approvers; reviewers and approvers can be the same [spiffxp] + * [christoph] agrees with aaron + * [christoph] sig arch should be involved with ambiguous project wide decision; take the lead on what sig-docs is recommending + * [zach] kep template says that reviewers need to be a different pool + * [tim sc] must have been a change; not many pools of people + * [aaron] want to make sure we move forward with this + * [zach] + * Steering @ KubeCon updates? 10 mins + * Christoph is the only maybe + * Reach out to nanci to cancel - paris to reach out + * Contributor summit lead (jeff): possible virtual event + * Is there a deadline for decisions? + * [proposal](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FH24lkoLS0mQcXNhYbk08L9qXzjrCaVgnCGwGSirGmc/edit#heading=h.jf1xvu7twvpn) + * Community Group Health Check 10 mins + * Work through this more for 10 mins + * Continue to go through backlog 15 mins + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues) + * Take to chairs and leads meeting - staffing gaps + * Look at onboarding check list - paris + * Community Q&A: + +## February 3, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Paris +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Paris Pittman + * Christoph Blecker + * Tim St. Clair + * Derek Carr + * Nikhita Raghunath + * Davanum Srinivas +* Members of the Community present: + * +* Topics + * Steering Panel for Amsterdam [cblecker] + * Panel is set. 5 of 7 steering members expected. + * Schedule may change, as there is a conflict with another session that cblecker/nikhita are doing + * File an issue for the slides (about us) so that we can tee up the panel and questions + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/154](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/154) + * [nikhita] Revisit User Groups as a part of the Kubernetes community. Can they move to [CNCF user groups](https://github.com/cncf/enduser-public#end-user-sigs-and-user-groups)? + * What was the reason that this was created as part of our structure vs cncf? + * Timsc: cloud provider sigs ended up being a user forum group and not a contributor one + * Derek: there were sigs that didnt own code and seems like it makes sense to do user groups for those + * Dims: do we know if they are making progress? Are they active? + * Timsc: there is a fair amount of cloud provider stuff that is active + * Timsc: broad update where everyone is at (user groups) + * Nikhita: can take that as an action to check + * Christoph: this is where a check in could help + * Christoph: steering should explicitly say yes once the proposal is in. + * Derek: doesn’t like lazy consensus for the formation of this either. Doesn’t know where the boundaries would be. + * Steve wong: there were a lot of users in the cloud provider groups; likely to see more user groups + * Paris: maybe cheryl with cncf can help us figure out a solution here + * Christoph: whether thats housed in cncf or ours, we need to define that light touch (maybe could tie in kubecon maintainer track) + * Derek: are there working groups that don’t have an end state? Lets audit them. Have cncf look into this too. Look into the health check, too, and come up with the questions to ask. + * Christoph: +1 to what derek is saying; focus on working groups and user groups first with audit + * A Working Group status resource is the updates delivered in the community meeting. Calendar for 2019 is [here](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1adztrJ05mQ_cjatYSnvyiy85KjuI6-GuXsRsP-T2R3k/edit#gid=1543199895): An example of such a status report is [here](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ozby628UmK91fGOoo_10YDSRJ0BVlUIx-YAF4iwlyOA/edit#slide=id.g62d1d3d748_0_7) + * Ihor: groups were designed for end-user member companies @ cncf + * [https://github.com/cncf/enduser-public#cncf-end-user-community](https://github.com/cncf/enduser-public#cncf-end-user-community) https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues + * [https://github.com/cncf/toc#sigs](https://github.com/cncf/toc#sigs) + * [https://github.com/cncf/toc/pulls](https://github.com/cncf/toc/pulls) + * Derek: wants to find out more about sigs at cncf level and other groups; doesn’t have the facts + * Derek: follow up on 153 - need volunteers to see to completion + * Paris and derek to collaborate on questionnaire + * Go through backlog - 21 issues + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues) + +## January 20, 2020 [Closed Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Christoph +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Christoph Blecker + * Derek Carr + * Nikhita Raghunath + * Paris Pittman + * Davanum Srinivas +* Members of the Community present: + * N/A +* Topics + * Steering Panel for Amsterdam + * Explanation of what steering is + * Have better seed questions + * Possibly right before a break + * Christoph to follow up on panel + * Chair Meeting(s) + * There was value, and these will continue + * Lots of different communication methods + * Agenda ahead of time, minutes afterwards to the mailing list + * CNCF Contributor Experience + * High level SIG at CNCF level + * Take some of our learnings to the rest of the CNCF + * Contributor Experience Survey - next steps + * 211 responses + * User Groups + * Follow up discussion on [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/149](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/149) + * Concerns about proliferation? + * Possibly move to CNCF? + * Suggestion for Apache [PMC-style roll call](https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#roll-call) + * Public meeting calendar invite + +## January 6, 2020 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: +* Artifacts: + * Note Taker: Christoph +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger + * Paris Pittman + * Christoph Blecker + * Davanum Srinivas + * Nikhita Raghunath + * Tim St. Clair +* Members of the Community present: + * +* Topics + * Moving thurs community meeting to monthly - castrojo + * [sig-governance.md ](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-steering/governance/sig-governance.md)states SIGs need to give an update quarterly but won’t meet that with new cadence ([https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4323](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4323)) + * Sigs do status updates at kubecon - count for this? + * SIG updates out to sig mailing list? Should we allow updates via office hours? + * SIG updates should be to the community at large, rather than just to the SIG itself + * Quarterly cadence lines up to the release cycle + * CNCF TOC Seat Follow Up + * Deadline was extended to Jan 4th; numbers went out by amye + * We need to widen our pool of eligibility for kubernetes (right now its kubernetes/community root, sc, and select few others) + * [https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4002](https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4002) + * Please see [https://www.cncf.io/blog/2019/12/13/faq-for-december-2019-toc-nominations/](https://www.cncf.io/blog/2019/12/13/faq-for-december-2019-toc-nominations/) as well + * FYI - + * ContribEx survey is going out today; pls get out to your contributor groups. Putting in servicedesk ticket for creative report post results. + * SIG Chair/TL monthly call being organized; [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4364](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4364) + * Please take this to any sigs you are in and talk to chairs/tls diff --git a/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2021-meeting-notes.md b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2021-meeting-notes.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..3544c238 --- /dev/null +++ b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2021-meeting-notes.md @@ -0,0 +1,1171 @@ +## Dec 13, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Paris + +**Note taker**: Jordan + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* Quick votes/put your lgtm in/add emoji reaction: + 1. [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6274](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6274) - kdev email migration rename + 2. [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/231](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/231) - bosun.md modifications + 3. [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/223](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/223) - annual report deadlines inside of issue body +* Quick discussion/actions needed? + * Charter update for cocc [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6247](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6247) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/224](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/224) - steering / cocc conflict of interest resolution + * **AI: We need a sync with cocc and someone to take an action there ** +* Deep dive into [sustainability plan](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qeoP6i7GBTVJuJE1AGY5iU9dqmAOxrjqkfNQ2-rBeyI/edit#heading=h.koj07ciun0s8) [15 mins] + * [Gap analysis ](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qeoP6i7GBTVJuJE1AGY5iU9dqmAOxrjqkfNQ2-rBeyI/edit#heading=h.sv6elf11kc6h) + * paris: **looking for liaisons to help gather this info; need executive summary, very concrete asks (in terms of specific staffing/budget/projects), very concrete reasons (risks, features slipping, etc)** + * cblecker: would this make sense to use a question in the annual report to gather? + * dims: we have sufficient information to make a request to GB, not sure adding more details/info is necessary + * cblecker: would it make sense to pick "pilot" sigs/areas to improve staffing/support? + * tpepper: ties to KubeCon keynote on bringing employees to key functional areas in projects, TOC/GB reps are people who can influence those business choices + * stephen: +1 on gathering info as part of annual reports, +1 on prioritizing most urgent sig needs + * paris: sort of a chicken/egg issue of budget/staffing and concrete plans to address issues; + * dims: it's going to be hard to try to address all needs simultaneously; agree with prioritizing and doing a trial with top needs + * Paris: what would we define as a “Kubernetes Fellow” role? + * Dims can help draft stuff for k8s/fellow. +* Annual reports [10 minutes] + * Any updates? Past items or current + * Quick question review + * inline in [annual report doc](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-steering/governance/annual-reports.md#2021-and-on) + * Roles for annual reports: + * Prep - ensure [questions](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-steering/governance/annual-reports.md#questions-for-report) and process is up to date + * Jordan leading this, targeting complete/ready for review 12/16 (process depends on generator, generator depends on questions) + * process cleanup at [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6295](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6295) + * question cleanup at [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6301](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6301) + * Tools + * Generator for tracking issues, template md files + * Christoph is building one, need folks who can run it later (depends on questions) + * Include/generate links to devstats queries with year/sig plugged in in generated template + * Devstats/queries + * Accuracy is a concern especially around file-paths for PRs + * Add wg/sig label filter to Contributions chart: [https://github.com/cncf/devstats/issues/299](https://github.com/cncf/devstats/issues/299) + * Comms - announce to dev@kubernetes.io, etc + * Paris can help and engage upstream marketing team + * start in January after templates are generated + * Outreach/reminders to individual group leads - liaisons + * start in January after templates are generated + * Summary + * ~March after individual group reports are submitted + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/228](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/228) + * Prioritize sub-items related to annual reports are a dependency for Jan 2 + * Incrementally PR more into liaison play book after that +* Owners files and promoting people [10 mins] + * [community-membership.md](https://git.k8s.io/community/community-membership.md) follow-up from your chair asks + * Are they using it to promote folks? Do they have their own? + * dims: ask in annual report + * bob: these are general guidelines; push on groups that have additional processes/requirements to document those and how new folks can engage and get promoted into those roles + * [Stephen] to add color with SIG Release/Release Engineering examples + * help make sure automation we set up plays nicely with the types of subproject or subpackage memberships sig-release sets up for things like changelog reviewers + * [Funding] Do we need a contractor on owners file work? Scripts to help ID folks to promote are blocked by this work and many other initiatives + * [Invalid owners files in sigs.yaml · Issue #4125 · kubernetes/community · GitHub](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4125) + * [Subprojects in sigs.yaml will be instantly out of date · Issue #1913 · kubernetes/community · GitHub](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1913) + * dims: first instinct is to use as an LFX mentorship project, will need iteration which doesn't lend itself to a crisp scope-of-work for a contractor + * stephen: have been using the tool to cull inactive folks, works well for that; less sure about using it for promotion/nomination + * dims: cleanup is higher priority (avoid routing issues/PRs to inactive folks), easier to do since we have signal for activity, makes it more obvious where we need folks + * bob: more than just adding/removing reviewers; for example, reverse mappings of packages to sigs/subprojects is needed +* Chairs and TLs policy and procedure [10 mins] + * We need to see PRs for the following, who wants to take a go at them? PRs will help us with further discussion: + * Selection process: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5855](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5855) + * Terms and Term Limits for CHAIRS (not TL): [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5886](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5886) + * Should TLs be mandatory/explicit: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5890](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5890) + * [Bob] +1 for explicit. The roles are frequently conflated with each other and they need to be treated as separate responsibilities. + * [Christoph] Do we have sufficient community consensus? + * recollection was there were people in favor, people opposed, and people unsure on all of these topics. + * Is this a purely mechanical change, or is it proposing that different people must hold the two roles? + * Jordan: my understanding was it was a mechanical change to make explicit the responsibilities in chair and TL roles, and who was fulfilling those responsibilities (even if it's the same person) + * Bob: there was a lot of confusion about the chair/TL split, which reinforces my perspective that they should be split and clarified + * Dims: think we should start bottom up with defining membership, who are a SIG’s decision makers? + * Paris: think we can do explicit TL/chair in parallel + * Stephen: +1 on explicit TL/chair, and also asking if there are other roles not listed in common governance docs + * Tim: can Steering define baseline operations of governance for all SIG/WGs, and delegate/defer finer grained operational definitions to each SIG/WG as they see fit? + * Jordan: common ask from TL/chairs was “what problem is this solving”? + + +## Dec 6, 2021 [Public Meeting] (recording) + +**Bosun**: Paris + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) - will be late +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims)~~ +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Josh Berkus +* Arnaud Meukam +* Ihor Dvoretskyi +* Kendall Nelson +* Sergey Kanzhelev + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +* [1 min] DONE - Liaisons for committees: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6260](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6260) + +**Topics** + +* Is this done? What else needs to be done here? [1 mins] + * Artifact Hub issue: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/188](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/188) + * AI for bob this week + * Chair responsiveness:[https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4289](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/4289) + * Stephen: annual reports were not a thing at the time of this, we also have the leads meeting + * Bob: this was also pre-steering-liaison as well, which has helped some with community group communication + * Bob: to go through the existing comments to affirm none remain unaddressed (if so shift to separate issue?) +* Needs an owner/assignment [1 min] + * to run down with CNCF for contributor travel funding: [Issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/109); [last comment](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/109#issuecomment-984905164) + * Stephen + * Ihor is going to check with CNCF on their current take + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1913](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/1913) - sigs yaml / subproject stuff + * Jordan + * To get a quote and then start funding process for lead training: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5913](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5913) + * Tim and paris will pair in 2022 +* [Sergey Kanzhelev] Dockershim removal user feedback, comms, and sponsoring work to support migration off dockershim ([SIG Node discussion 11/30/2021](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ne57gvidMEWXR70OxxnRkYquAoMpt56o75oZtg-OeBg/edit#bookmark=id.r77y11bgzid)). [2 mins] + * [Bob] For initial blog post, message should come from sig-arch and sig-node. This is more of a technical/architectural decision and they would be the right groups to talk about the issue. + * [christoph] we support sig release, sig arch, and sig node for making the decisions needed; for comms - steering doesn’t take on technical decisions + * [paris] lets work with the end user community too and make sure this is on their agenda + * [Stephen] Request from Celeste + other coordinators for SIG Release to assist w/ messaging as well + + Notes: + +1. Dockershim deprecation announcement was made a year ago +2. Migration numbers are not ideal based on for example DataDog survey, ie: ~10% have migrated off dockershim, ~90% remain on it +3. Survey was conducted and shown: + + **_TL;DR; The number of people who don't feel prepared is over 40%. The most common reason for not migrating is a dependency on docker, in most cases those dependencies are from both - self-authored and third-party tools. 40% of respondents who do NOT feel ready for dockershim removal planned to adopt 1.24 in 2022. There are a list of tasks I compiled from free text comments. The need to re-educate personnel, change processes and tooling, without the direct business benefit (basically the cost of operation) is a big complaint that we also need to address as a community._** + + + [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DiwCRJffBjoLuDguW9auMXS2NTmkp3NAS7SGJQBu8JY/edit#heading=h.wzgwyg229djr](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DiwCRJffBjoLuDguW9auMXS2NTmkp3NAS7SGJQBu8JY/edit#heading=h.wzgwyg229djr) + +4. Some comments from the survey: + + Many comments about specific scenarios that doesn't have any docs coverage + + + _To me, this is a lot of work for a change that doesn't seem to offer much benefit. Kubernetes keeps changing, and staying current is almost a full time job. The frequent upgrade cycle seems to be for the benefit of the Kubernetes engineers, not the end users._ + +5. SIG Node members spoke up ([SIG Node discussion 11/30/2021](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ne57gvidMEWXR70OxxnRkYquAoMpt56o75oZtg-OeBg/edit#bookmark=id.r77y11bgzid)): + 1. End users are getting enough time. There is an extra full year (till December 2022) while kubernetes 1.23 (with dockershim) will be supported by upstream. And likely longer for managed platforms. + 2. The lack of CRI support by third party tools vendors is a chicken-and-egg problem. Vendors are not migrating as end users keep using dockershim. And end users keep using dockershim because of dependency to these vendors. And the only way to resolve the chicken-and-egg problem in this case is to set a strict deadline. + 3. Deadline extension will keep draining contributors' energy and unlikely will change the situation drastically in terms of adoption numbers. + 4. Some problems listed by end users in the feedback form comments section can be addressed by documentation. +6. Things that look bad: + 5. Vendors and third party tool authors are very slow to react for this change. Effectively leaving end users with no viable alternative till very recently. + 6. Many documentation tasks for end users, especially self-hosted, are still pending. + 7. CRI was just promoted to v1 (from v1alpha2) in 1.23. + 8. Kubeadm didn’t even update docs to indicate the runtime deprecation. Still uses Docker as a default. From the end users perspective using Kubeadm, it is hard to find out that it was deprecated. There is no migration story as well. + 9. Promised backup [story](https://www.mirantis.com/blog/mirantis-to-take-over-support-of-kubernetes-dockershim-2/) from Mirantis is in limbo now. + + Embracing the CNCF value #1: + + + [(a) Fast is better than slow. The foundation enables projects to progress at high velocity to support aggressive adoption by users.](https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/master/charter.md#:~:text=(a)%20fast%20is%20better%20than%20slow.%20the%20foundation%20enables%20projects%20to%20progress%20at%20high%20velocity%20to%20support%20aggressive%20adoption%20by%20users.) + +7. We had an initial session with Celeste Horgan, Bob Killen and others on comms/tasks we may need to complete. +8. Asks: + 10. Secure commitment from CNCF to work on the migration tasks and provide educational materials for end users. Ideally announce this commitment as steps to mitigate the user feedback. + 1. Bob: CNCF has committed, docs folks lined up + 2. Stephen: also, sig-release can track delivery of these docs/artifacts as a prereq for release of 1.24 when dockershim is removed + 11. Before dockershim will be removed, publish the blog post from Steering, indicating acknowledgement of the user survey results, possibly commitment for docs updates and support, and reasoning why we proceed (empathy blog post). + 3. stephen: comms should come from sig-arch/node (with some input from sig-release on the release specifics) + 4. Christoph: agrees the technical authority is delegated here to the SIGs, is not Steering’s place to do such a post. Do agree though with the technical decisions made + 12. Consider extending EOL time for 1.23 as the last version with dockershim. + 5. stephen: minor version release lifecycle [already includes a ~2 month maintenance period](https://kubernetes.io/releases/patch-releases/#support-period) beyond 1 year to accommodate situations like this + 13. Help define, document, and get necessary commitments for this issue: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5344](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5344) Some ideas: + 1. Get CNCF help talking to vendors, projects, and end users. + 2. Deprecation timeline of 1 year, given many third party tools dependencies, looks aggressive. Need to make sure there is a clear message about what vendors and end users need to accomplish in that year. +* [Election Retro](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1edqfsSNk_p746PcXlbHTJa8ZHNlnw3QEqNPzlVDJmUc/edit#) Item: [10 mins] + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5092](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5092) - Refine rules on exceeding maximal representation for SC election + * + * [SC Candidate criteria should be revisited](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/227). At this time there are no restrictions on who can run. Should there be a minimum requirement such as org member? Valid voter etc? + * Stephen: feel like SC eligibility should include being an eligible voter + * Christoph: current requirements were intentionally set up as open by the bootstrap committee (not that they couldn't be changed), but the reasoning was that restricting who can vote was a clearer line to draw, and was sufficient, while leaving the candidacy aspect open (to allow the community to draw leaders from outside the community if desired) + * Bob: gut reaction is candidates should be an org member (ensures they are on mailing lists, etc). If we don't do that, and keep current stance, we should at document why the current requirement is the way it is (since the question has come up multiple times) + * AI for steering members: comment/vote on issue + * Comments from retro: + * Consider who gets excluded, are there Steering level stakeholders who would not be GitHub active (eg: user group folks?) + * Beware the trap of SC getting to decide who can and cannot be on SC + * [Automatically add anyone in Sigs.yaml to voters?](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/226) + * groups that are active but work in private are frequent sources of voter exception requests + * Stephen: in favor of private committees, in favor of sigs.yaml IF we ensure people listed there are current (some user groups, etc, might ) + * AI for steering members: comment on issue + * Finally: ContribEx forming Elections subproject +* Annual Reports [15 mins] + * Wrap up from last time [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207) + * Need to set an issue for the wg reporting into sponsoring sigs + * Stephen: sponsorship seems not a thing otherwise + * to create issue + * Jordan: Should they tag/email their sponsoring SIG to review their annual report? (annual cadence isn't ideal, but is better than current?) + * Generator update: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5514](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5514) + * Christoph can put the time in the next month; contribex mentees are looking into this in the meantime + * Jordan and Stephen update on automatable questions ([ref](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207#issuecomment-984871009)) + * Jordan: PR to update annual report template to prioritize questions we know will need human answers, and mark questions that can/should be automatable + * Tim: unsure how much can be automated in all cases for some of these (positive case is easy to verify, negative case requires human assessment, e.g. meeting was cancelled so recording wasn't uploaded) + * + * [Bob] Need a tool to crawl shared repos (e.g. k/k, k/enhancements, etc) to update subproject OWNERS files + feed to devstats for accurate reporting. + * to set issue + * + * [Dates and Deadlines](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/223) + * Questions complete: target 1/15/22, stretch goal 1/1/22 + * Community group drafts ready for review: discuss + * Community group drafts merged: discuss + * Annual report merged: maybe 3/31/22? + * Who is doing what + * Prep + * are there ways we can tweak questions so they are easier to drop directly into the summary? + * Google Form? Add structure to the ask and recording of answer + * Outreach + * + * Summary + * this was by far the hardest part last year + * definitely need to find ways to distribute this + * liaisons pull in content from their groups + * other ways to shard? +* [Sustainability Plan](https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1qeoP6i7GBTVJuJE1AGY5iU9dqmAOxrjqkfNQ2-rBeyI/edit) [15 mins] + * Needs analysis + * [Paris] Liaisons should work w/ groups to determine needs + * What we need that still doesn’t have a solution + * “Is it meeting the annual report?” / do we have a baseline to determine what's good + * are maintainers spending their time/energy training new folks, putting out fires, keeping the lights on, improving/developing scalable approaches to maintaining their components, new work, support of existing work? +* Topics from the community + * [your name here] + + +## Nov 15, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Dims +* Note taker: Jordan +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) + * Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) + * Tim Pepper (@tpepper) +* Agenda + * Promotion process for sigs + * Are folks using to promote people (e.g. to Reviewer, Approver, Subproject owner)? + * Possible sig specific notes on what it would take for a person to be promoted as reviewer/approver/chair (sig-node was doing something?) + * Chartering involves calling out where your area differs from project norm, adding linkage to area-specific membership processes or highlighting in the doc where they differ from [community-membership.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/community-membership.md) would clarify + * Bob: mechanical suggestion is to include link to description of requirements in OWNERS file as a comment + * Tim: "With no objections from other subproject owners" language gives pause… worries can block healthy change and turnover, risks opaque black-balling of a candidate + * AI: review [community-membership.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/community-membership.md), consider updates on if/how a candidate might be blocked + * Christoph: would area-specific changes to reviewer/approver requirements require steering review? + * Dims: envision a gradual process (ask in annual report process, work with individual groups currently facing difficulties here, eventually end up with language or links in charter) + * Bob: want to find a balance between making steering a bottleneck for updates while giving a recourse to someone encountering requirements that don't seem possible to meet + * Paris: suggest liaisons ask their community groups to get a baseline of current state: + * Question 1 - do you deviate from this community membership doc + * Question 2 - do you have it written down + * Question 3 - can you put that written down thing somewhere public + * SIG / WG Liaisons + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/liaisons.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/liaisons.md) + * P0: Transitioning groups from outgoing steering members to incoming members + * P1: Also consider any rebalancing that might be helpful + * AI: start doc to transition liaisons + * Add liaisons for committees? + * General agreement that having someone paying attention to needs from committees is good + * Especially useful for committees that work in private (CoCC, PSC, etc) and easy to lose track of how they are doing + * What’s important to us this year? + * We used to do this in person when things were non-pandemic state, getting to know each others' priorities is important to this crew + * AI: Paris to schedule quality time w/ Steering members :) + * Annual Reports + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207) - things we need to do before next reporting cycle + * theme: less toil for report authors + * Jordan+Stephen: look at last year’s reports, specifically note the things for which there was not a tool and that meant human toil, give concrete ask instead of broad help to devstats dev + * + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/223](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/223) - dates and deadlines for next reporting cycle + * + * Bosun : Paris to run the next 2 steering meetings + * Private December meeting is currently 12/20, will we have quorum or do we need to move earlier? + + +## Nov 8, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Dims +* Note taker: Jordan +* Steering Attendees: + * ~~Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables)~~ + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) + * Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) + * Tim Pepper (@tpepper) +* Topics + * [election officers] 2021 Steering Committee Election Results + * Re-elected Members + * Paris Pittman + * Christoph Blecker + * Newly elected Members + * Stephen Augustus + * Tim Pepper + * Emeritus Members + * Nikhita Raghunath + * Derek Carr + * Our thanks to the election officers : Alison Dowdney, Josh Berkus, Noah Kantrowitz + * Thanks to all who ran + * Election retro scheduled? Initial election officer observations + * election mechanics went smoothly + * most candidates for any election + * downward trend on absolute numbers of voters + * AI: date for retro + * Transition planning & [onboarding](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/onboarding.md) + * AI: [issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/219) copying [onboarding checklist](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/onboarding.md) (by tradition assigned to incoming members) + * handoff of owned issues from derek/nikhita + * handoff of community group liaisons from derek/nikhita + * Tim Code of Conduct committee transition + * (precedent with Paris vacating CoCC seat when joining steering) + * AI: formalize/document Steering/CoCC mutual exclusivity + * AI: promote runner-up from last CoCC election? Paris to look up results + * AI: set date for steering context handoff + * tracked in [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/219](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/219) + + +## Oct 18, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Davanum Srinivas +* Note taker: +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * ~~Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt)~~ + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * Kubecon debrief + * Positive feedback, encourage corporate support (cblecker) + * Wish they had heard this earlier (paris) + * GB Meeting debrief (wednesday / paris) + * Need to be more clear with asks + * SIG breakdown(s), what’s missing? Help middle managers make a case to get full time folks + * sig-cloud provider needs help too + * OpenStack attempted this once before with mixed results. They were good for single one off tasks, but not for maintainers - people that stick around. + * There was a big push for maintainers, not contributors - sustained contributions. + * Need more senior contributors, not just jrs that get trained up and eventually leave the project. + * Election progress + * All bios are in + * There are 2 slots available for steering candidates to ask questions of steering, and what its like to be on steering. + * Openstack PTG meeting this Friday + * [Issue Triage](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc) if time permits in k/steering + * [Issue Triage](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/labels/committee%2Fsteering) if time permits in k/community + * Maximal Representation issue (no changes) + * Write down rules for selecting GB rep and their lifecycle (open issue, thanks Paris!) + * Thanks a ton to both Derek and Nikhita! + * Would be good to have a retro. (when we bring in the new crew) also do a board walk for the first meeting with new crew. + +## Oct 4, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: @parispittman +* Note taker: @liggitt +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * ~~Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr)~~ + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * [Kendall] OpenStack Technical Committee Invite to PTG + * Dates/Times Available: + * Monday, Oct 18 15 UTC - 17 UTC + * Thursday, Oct 21, 13 UTC - 17 UTC + * Friday, Oct 22, 13 UTC - 17 UTC - Dims +1, Bob +1, Paris +1 + * [Free Registration](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/project-teams-gathering-october-2021-tickets-161235669227) + * AI: reach out to kendall with specific time in the above slots that works for most steering members to sync up (16-17UTC on 10/22 looks best currently) + * [paris] Working on sustainable staffing ideas doc + * [Please add yours and comment to the doc](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qeoP6i7GBTVJuJE1AGY5iU9dqmAOxrjqkfNQ2-rBeyI/edit?usp=sharing ) + * Part of Paris' work on special projects committee of GB + * k8s-infra, testing, docs, contribx staffing needs identified + * AI: steering liaisons sync with your sigs/wgs this week to get feedback and ask for specific needs and include them in the doc + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) - done 2021-10-08 + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/215](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/215) - this is important; wg-> sig transition docs + * We also need clarity on turning down a WG (how many steering members need to weigh in?) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/214](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/214) + * Specific questions: + * what is the process of converting a wg to a sig? + * cblecker: review/comment timeframe? does the proposal need to be brought to a public meeting first? who weighs in? what's the minimum comment period? + * cblecker: explicit ack vs lazy consensus + * cblecker: establish timeframes so the proposer and the commenters understand expectations to get / provide feedback + * Jordan: sponsorings sigs need to ack on the conversion and there needs to be a clear assignment of each aspect of wg artifacts/work to a sig (either one of the wg's sponsoring sigs or the proposed new sig) + * Dims: There should be discussion around creation/deletion in a public meeting + * cblecker: we need to provide better visibility to public steering agendas ahead of time so people know when something will be discussed and what the right forum is to provide feedback + * dims: agree, though there's a tension around wanting to work async to avoid blocking/waiting for meetings, but balanced with giving time and allowing for interaction during meetings on topics + * how many steering members required (majority >= ½, or super majority, >= ⅔)? + * steering voting requirement for wg creation is a [simple majority](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/sig-wg-lifecycle.md#prerequisites-for-a-wg) (e.g. 4/7) + * steering voting requirement for sig creation is unclear? + * jordan: wg → sig conversion should match that (once clarified) + * dims: gut feel is super majority (e.g. 5/7) (+1 paris, +1 jordan) + * cblecker: don't feel strongly about simple vs super majority for sig creation; think the timelines, feedback processes are more important + * dims: even if it is done async, need to be clear on time allowed for feedback, number of steering members input + * cblecker: should it be possible to form or promote a wg→ sig without it appearing in a public meeting? + * dims: in the spirit of lettings sigs make decisions and self-organize, should a meeting be required? + * jordan: establishing sigs is rare and ~one of the most important things steering does… doing async work ahead of time in threads/docs/issues/comments is good, but if anything deserved discussion in a well-publicized synchronous meeting, this seems like it does + * AI: cblecker: propose PR update to sig establishment/wg promotion process + * Speaking of, any comments for wg-naming and wg-component-standard? Both are turning down / done sunsetting + * dims: many thanks to leads of both groups + * contribx channel/list turndowns in progress + * some owner file cleanups remaining, acked by wg leads + * election status + * nominations open + * Note: – quorum lost, bob had to drop – + * Bosun and other roles of steering committee + * paris: following stated guidelines on bosuning meetings ([https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/bosun.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/bosun.md)) important to ensure distribution of work and engagement of community + * dims +1 (also, dims will be bosun for november) + * liggitt +1 + * paris: think we need to rotate steering work (issue wrangler, pr wrangler, communications lead) to ensure SLOs on work in progress, clarify who is responsible for moving work forward + * jordan: in favor of clarifying responsibilities and establishing a rotation for the year so all seven of us are not chasing the ball all at once (or all seven of us assuming one of the other six is). strawman: ~4 areas, set up monthly rotation for the year once new steering members are in place, if you can't make a rotation swap with someone + * Order a bosun whistle?: * + +## Sep 20, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Bob Killen +* Note taker: +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * ~~Christoph Blecker (@cblecker)~~ + * ~~Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr)~~ + * ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims)~~ + * ~~Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt)~~ + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * ~~Paris Pittman (@parispittman)~~ +* Topics + +## Sep 13, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Bob Killen +* Note taker: Christoph Blecker +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Community attendees: + * Alison Dowdney + * Arnaud Meukam + * Ihor Dvoretskyi + * Lubomir Ivanov + * Kendall Nelson +* Topics + * [Bob] Default branch rename of steering owned repositories (k/steering, k/funding) + * AI: Bob will take care of it later today + * [paris] Do we need extensions re: election? + * election committee set? ([thread](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/nB1K0XZeYRQ/m/DXf9uj-4CAAJ), [PR](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5986)) + * [Update community repo for the 2021 elections](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5986) + * AI for steering, please review! + * AI: Alison to talk to other election committee members. + * Follow up item, kubecon in Nov may be a permanent change + * [paris] Started asking chairs for sustainability suggestions including areas that need staffing/contract support + * Paris will send a draft doc to chairs for comment; goal of presenting to GB and having a plan for testing, docs, contribex and other support + * Current convos around staffing json-iterator and go-yaml; lucas brought up that this is a problem across cncf projects + * Jordan: stdlib/third-party serialization libraries specifically are ~all in a questionable state (gogo-protobuf, yaml, json-iterator). sig-api-machinery owns most of the code around these, sig-architecture is probably the right place for a policy around stdlib implementations vs third-party implementations vs Kubernetes forks of third-party implementations. AI: add to sig-architecture / sig-api-machinery meeting agendas + +## Aug 16, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph Blecker +* Note taker: +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims)~~ + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * CoCC issue + * Cocc election - please vote + * Pop quiz - do we need a majority? + * Conversion of wg-k8s-infra to a SIG + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5928](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5928) + * Follow up on AIs from last meeting + * I think we are ready to merge!! [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5736](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5736) + * All feedback from previous meetings and comments addressed + +## Aug 2, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph Blecker +* Note taker: +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * ~~Paris Pittman (@parispittman) ~~ +* Community attendees: + +* Topics + * WG Naming Dissolution request + * [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/8fy8omuKdpM](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/8fy8omuKdpM) + * Bob had talked to Chairs (Celeste/Stephen) on moving things out (dangling artifacts, maybe some of them can stay where it is now) + * Evaluation framework docs + * AI for (link to from API review/conventions docs) + * Who drives evolution of the framework in the future? (maybe we don't imagine the framework evolving much… may not need active owners?) + * Who owns work identified? Looks like component owner sigs, sig-release/k8s-infra/contribex etc own the actions (make sure there are issues open/tracking) + * AI for Bob to talk to the Chairs again and make sure AI’s are followed up. + * "kubernetes and kubernetes-sigs org membership should be equivalent" + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/org/issues/966](https://github.com/kubernetes/org/issues/966) + * Now that we don’t have incubator and have a handle on the stale folks (and we prune folks), seems like a good idea now. (we pruned 400 people in the recent past). + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/org/issues/966#issuecomment-822045622](https://github.com/kubernetes/org/issues/966#issuecomment-822045622) has stats on "in kubernetes-sigs, not in kubernetes" org + * 5 steering members present today all voted in favor of making the membership equivalent. The ball is back in sig-contribex court. + * Can someone help drive this stuff? + * Annual Reports Actions and Wrap Up + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207) + * Also set issues for each theme and assign someone - the membership theme has one already + * Individual tasks needs owners to drive. + * Christoph to help shepherd the AI(s) / tasks. + * Should TechLeads be mandatory? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5890](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5890) + * Explicitly list out who is the TL for each SIG + * Get feedback on changing Governance doc first! (email to chairs/leads and discussion in their mailing list) + * AI: for Bob to gather feedback. + * Terms and Term Limits for Chairs + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5886](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5886) + * AI: Same as above, we need to gather feedback as well. This is assigned to Paris already. Jordan has volunteered to help with this as well, will prep request for feedback for chairs/leads meeting next week. + * Elana has requested to split the “Term” vs “Term Limit” separate. +1 from various folks, but will take discussion to issue. + * Derek: how do minimum requirements for number of folks in leadership roles interact with terms/term limits? Ideally we want overlap to get successors up to speed, etc. Will add comments to issue. + * Derek: did openstack add terms/term limits? Dims: they do have voting on a periodic basis, unsure about term length or limits. + * Project energy needs to be balanced with the frequency of elections as it takes up time/effort. + * This is an FYI only that a funding request is going to come through: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5913](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5913) + * Leadership training options! + * Yay! + * GB meeting end result: we should meet with every GB member individually to see what they can help out with from their org (time, money, etc). We asked for more full time engineers and headcount for testing, infra, docs, community. + * Thanks a ton for doing this Paris! + * GB meeting kubecon discussion summary (dims) + * mostly focused on safety, requirements, plans for venue + * event is a go at this point unless venue or governmental entities intervene + * oscon is running before kubecon, intended to have same vaccine requirements, dry-run for kubecon procedures + * bob: also factors into contributor summit planning + * dims: another smaller event around the same time [https://events.linuxfoundation.org/lf-member-summit/](https://events.linuxfoundation.org/lf-member-summit/) + * WG k8s infra convert to SIG + * [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/udk1gQn0q0w/m/zf_uac2DBQAJ](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/udk1gQn0q0w/m/zf_uac2DBQAJ) + * AI(Jordan): add comment to get review/feedback/ack from stakeholder sigs before steering [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/wg-k8s-infra#stakeholder-sigs](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/wg-k8s-infra#stakeholder-sigs) + * AI: Nikhita as WG liaison to help with progress + * SC election update + * Bob and Josh are on point. Update in a week or so. + * Call for community member questions/topics + +## July 19, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Paris Pittman +* Topics: + * Annual Reports + * Next phase of work + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207) + * How to handle governance issues + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/212](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/212) + * Steering member takes 1 theme’d issue + * Paris will look to see what themes we don’t have issues for + * If it’s a community like or contribex owned, then contribex owns the issue + * Steering Committee Election guide and election information + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/190](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/190) + * Contribex will recommend for EC + * 50+ contributions a year, github member status - async vote + * Who can run? - change policy to say must have a valid voter before they can run? no + * Happen in the next two weeks + * Naming Working Group + * Wait until PR is filed + * Sig-arch can be back stop for things that don’t have owners + * Sig-release is going to do the switch + * CNCF updates + * Next GB meeting at the end of the month + * Do we have any open ended funding matters? + * [paris] we should revive the contributor travel / kubecon + * Let chairs and tech leads know if folks need funding then they should contact us + +## July 12, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Paris Pittman +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * ~~Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr)~~ + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Community attendees: + * Aaron Crickenberger (@spiffxp) + * Konstantin Semenov (@jhvhs) + * Scott Andrews (@scothis) + * Ben Hale (@nebhale) + * Rey Lejano (@reylejano) + * Nabarun Pal (@palnabarun) + * Aeva Black (@AevaOnline) + * Baiju Muthukadan (@baijum) +* Note Taker(s) + * spiffxp +* Topics: + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5855](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5855) - Better Selection of Chairs/TLs + * Context: + * There have been ongoing discussions around how SIG Chairs are selected. Idea of term limits came up + * There is no standard way across the community of handling leadership changes. Some have leadership nominate + SIG consensus, some have mini-elections + * Are there things we should make mandatory? E.g. selection process, role lifecycle, TL role + * We’ve had lots of healthy discussion on the issue, trying to discern if there are any conclusions that can be drawn + * Notes + * Seems like three things: mechanisms for selecting leads, terms/term-limits, TL role optional-or-mandatory. Maybe don’t try to handle all three at once? Which is most important, can we drive to conclusion + * TL optional or not. Maybe make it explicit so that those chairs that do double duty can be listed in both places, make it clearer that there are two buckets of work. + * Turn these three distinct things back over to the community vs. continuing to engage on attempting to talk about all the things? + * Terms/term-limits: could start with the concept of term, helps clarify what someone is stepping into, and separate from term-limit + * Everyone generally in favor of “terms” but want consensus from community leads + * Selection process - we didn’t really discuss, but will need to be a part of the conversation as we look at “terms mean you regularly have the opportunity to step-down/step-up” + * Decision/Action/Follow up: + * Break issue into 3 prongs above [dims/paris] + * Include data + * Include the why we are doing this for each one / what we are trying to solve + * Chair and tech leads to weigh in on each; timebox + * Get on the community meeting agenda + * Put mechanism first to decide - probably need the most feedback on this; could lead into the term discussion + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5736](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5736) Roles visibility PR + * Context: + * Looking to establish uniformity across SIGs + * Other roles for other SIGs + * Additional role definitions don’t need sign off from Steering + * Roles that peel off responsibilities from Chairs/TLs need steering approval, go through usual charter review process + * Roles that don’t take responsibilities off of Chair/TLs, more refine/define how the SIG executes, they don’t require steering approval + * Aligns with laissez-faire + * Eg. PRR / API Reviewer roles don’t blow the scope of SIG Architecture, so even if they choose to organize execution of those responsibilities “differently”, that doesn’t need an extra layer of steering review from a “core governance” perspective + * Decision/Action/Follow up: + * Take off tech lead line - open a new PR + * Put musts at the top + * Kdev + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5746](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5746) - Extend the scope of sig-service-catalog + * Context: + * The project itself has fallen into disuse, various stakeholders moved on to operator-based solutions, so it’s seen a lot less use these days + * There is still a need for the idea of bindings, some programmatic way of attaching provisioned services to running apps. Take the service-binding idea out of service catalog in a way that it can be used more generically + * Considering adopting a binding spec more specific to kubernetes vs. the generic spec used by e.g. cloudfoundry, heroku. Go beyond OSBAPI implementation, and be more k8s-native + * Notes + * Might make more sense for service binding to go to SIG Apps as a subproject instead? + * Does this still need to be its own SIG? + * The spec itself is designed to act as a bridge between service world and apps so it doesn’t really sit in either + * Sig-apps wasn’t initially responsive re: taking on the subproject but service-catalog did ‘ + * Started having trouble whether the scope expansion would fall in SIG SC vs. SIG Apps, which led to idea that maybe homing as a subproject in SIG Apps would make more sense + * Having a single SIG as point-of-contact for questions related to service binding and how it hooks up to apps seems more beneficial than have distinct technical boundaries fall at the SIG level vs. subproject level + * The thing that this was enabling was off-cluster services, but the move to “in-cluster” is what causes it to have overlap with SIG Apps / SIG Network + * Where is the maturity curve for this? The service binding spec is quite mature. Looking for a home in kubernetes to land. This is just another variant of how do I get credentials to an application. So if we were to land in SIG Service Catalog, it requires an expansion of their charter. If that doesn’t work, we definitely want to find someplace to land. + * Is this just a spec or is there a reference impl? Not a reference impl yet, but is broadly developed in the open. + * Could possibly be a CNCF thing? The entire spec is built basically on kubernetes, so it seemed to make sense to start here. + * SIG Service Catalog has been inactive in general, so seeing an expansion was a little surprising when looking at e.g. current status of meeting recordings, annual report, etc. SIG Apps has been more active than this, so if all you’re looking for is a home, maybe that makes more sense (but should poll Apps/Network for clarity) + * Decision/Action/Follow up: + * Talk to sig-apps [who?] - can this be a subproject of sig-apps instead of charter change for service catalog + * Talk to sig-network [who?] - get feedback from the sig-apps / sig-network leads to see if they see a clear distinction between their responsibilities and this proposal? + * Set up a meeting to force a time + * Liaison - bob, christoph, derek + * Can this be a working group discussion + * Should service catalog be a sig? + * Could this be housed in cncf? + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/213](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/213) - Google Workspace Automation + * Context: mailing lists, and stuff. Gcp org kubermetes.io that hosts project infra; tied to this workspace. Has five super admin (ihor, 3 SC, +1 more); spiffxp used to be a super admin and helped dims set up mailing list management but is no longer on steering so has lost super admin privs. Lots of back and forth with access and people who have keys. + * Notes: tldr - aaron needs super admin privs + * Jordan asked if super admins can read private groups - bob answered: not unless they add themselves to the groups directly, in that case there is an audit trail + * Decision/Action/Follow up: + * Dims to take action + * Discuss/Assign: - BUMP THESE TOPICS TO NEXT MEETING + * Annual Reports + * Next phase of work + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/207) + * How to handle governance issues + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/212](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/212) + * Steering Committee Election guide + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/190](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/190) + * CNCF updates + * Next GB meeting at the end of the month + * Do we have any open ended funding matters? + * [paris] we should revive the contributor travel / kubecon + +## June 21, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Nikhita/Paris +* Note Taker: +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * **[private]** CoCC issue + +## June 7, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Nikhita +* Note Taker: +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims)~~ + * ~~Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) - OOO~~ + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * Finish last comments on annual report summary and publish this!! Woohooo + * https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/209 + * Working on [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5736](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5736) + * What other roles should be linked? + * What is missing from context of text? + * Open Infra Live Episode [Kendall Nelson - diablo_rojo] (won’t be joining till close to the end of the meeting) + +## May 17, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Christoph +* Note Taker: Jordan +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * [Funding Request for streamyard](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/19) [bob] + * individual account seems usable for our purposes (no org account option currently) + * enables streaming without relying on individual's hardware + * wg-policy update [cblecker] + * got response from one existing lead, who indicated they did not have time to continue as lead + * was able to get control of WG channels/resources from existing lead + * attended last meeting (5/12) and spoke to attendees + * got a sense from attendees on history of leadership + * robert (proposed as lead, paperwork was not completed) + * jim (proposed as lead, also hadn't completed the process) + * plan is to communicate robert+jim as new wg-leads (when), wait for lazy consensus + * AI: follow-up if this doesn't surface this week + * first act of new leads will be to complete annual report questions and determine if the WG is accomplishing goals and should continue, or should shift the work elsewhere; will involve sponsoring sigs as well (primarily sig-auth) + * Outstanding PR: + * [Update LF course for inclusive training](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5328) + * Annual reports + * paris: could use help with liaisons filling in summary items for their groups, and reviewing themes + * AI for liaisons this week: + * merge reports from [outstanding groups](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+%222021+annual+report%22+in%3Atitle+) + * dims: usability + * paris: testing + * cblecker: service-catalog + * derek: network, autoscaling + * ~~liggitt: architecture~~ + * bob: apps + * fill in summary items and review themes + * gather and follow up with outstanding items/requests from groups + +## May 3, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: +* Note Taker: [need one] +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Community Members + +* Topics + * [2021 Annual Report Retro](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X7rQx4rC9FbpdLMI5C8FY9j4TmeH2m1aKy_i4kemHXo/edit) + + +## April 26, 2021 [Private Special Meeting] + +* Bosun: Bob +* Note Taker: Christoph +* Steering Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * [Add Program Manager governance docs](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5566) + * **Decision:** Consensus is to close this PR and not introduce a project-wide PgM role + * [Recognizing roles defined in SIGs and recognizing leaders in SIGs](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5722) + * **Decision:** New roles should not be added to sigs.yaml + * **Decision:** SIGs should be able to introduce new roles + * **Decision:** New roles should be sent to sig/k-dev with a 1 week lazy consensus period + * **Decision:** If a role includes delegation of responsibilities from a sig-governance role, that delegation should be documented in your charter + +## April 19th, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Bob +* Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * ~~Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr)~~ + * ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims)~~ + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * [Additional Community Group Roles](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5722) + * waiting for @dims to discuss + * Revisit Kubernetes [CNCF project maintainers](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Pr8cyp8RLrNGx9WBAgQvBzUUmqyOv69R7QAFKhacJEM/edit#gid=262035321) [Bob] + * Proposal: Add all community group leads as maintainers + * CNCF listed maintainers are the only members **consistently** sent comms regarding CNCF initiatives, announcements, and opportunities (mentoring, KubeCon maintainer talks etc). These are inconsistently forwarded on to the leads mailing list. + * Maintainers do get to participate in GB/TOC elections* (rules are slightly different for k8s) + * Kubernetes Steering elects a GB seat + * Kubernetes maintainers participate in the election of a TOC member using a [fractional voting method](https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/master/maintainers-election-policy.md#maintainer-voting) ([Example](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wrscxSVgtq8sp7vi59eVOhbFn_vrtdF49_xJqJ0yLRY/edit#gid=0)). + * Maintainers are usually granted access to the CNCF service desk, however a separate list of members can be provided + * [1Password approval (sc1/2/3 as root owners for org)](https://groups.google.com/g/kubernetes-sig-contribex/c/9eyzjOpT4mg/m/05CRuGGoBQAJ) [Bob] + * Maybe just [steering-private@kubernetes.io](mailto:steering-private@kubernetes.io) instead. It’d be easier to get notifications / act on issues as that account is actively being monitored. + * wg-policy leadership followup [cblecker] + +## April 5, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Paris +* Note Taker: [need one] +* Steering Attendees: + * ~~Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables)~~ + * ~~Christoph Blecker (@cblecker)~~ + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Community Members + * Kendall Nelson (@diablo_rojo) +* Topics + * Annual Reports [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/205](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/205) + * Due April 8th for next Chair and Tech Lead Meeting + * “Executive Summary” should be due then, too. / Maybe ‘State of K8s Groups’ etc + * [https://hackmd.io/R7hFEhc4SrOvaBl_vJDhEg](https://hackmd.io/R7hFEhc4SrOvaBl_vJDhEg) + * Discuss outreach plans + * How do we distro the summary? Blog? What else? + * Kdev mailing list + * Themes from reports so far + * Diversity + * Membership (slack? Mailing list? nothing?) + * Automation (zoom->youtube!) + * Autonomous subprojects (some repos started by SIGs seem to be run independently) + * SIGs that don’t meet + * May be review their charters? + * 30 mins per month mandatory? + * OpenStack Invites you to the PTG! + * The Technical Committee will be meeting from 13-17 UTC on Friday April 23rd (Also on Thursday April 22 from 13-14 UTC) We can reserve time for you if you know when would work best :) + * Week after kubecon + * A few of us think Friday is good - will convene and then slack Kendall with time + * Other business(?) + * Governing Board meeting on Apr 14, 2021 08:00 AM Pacific Time - let Paris know + * Governance requirements for meeting - look at the guidance + +## March 15, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Bob +* Note Taker: @liggitt +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * WG Naming // INI OSS workstream collaboration + * Program Manager Role + * dims: + * idea about recognizing SIG "coordinators" - [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/_QNg-xsawOg](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/steering/c/_QNg-xsawOg) + * Thinking of ways for people to advocate for allocating time from their day jobs to the community + * Thinking of ways to identify people who are in SIG leadership positions + * Would adding leaders for subprojects work for this? + * When a SIG has a particular role, giving them a way to surface that + * nikhita: does "coordinator" need a uniform definition + * dims: no strong opinion, could use chairs/TL definitions, or just give SIGs a way to define a local role and set of responsibilities + * cblecker: sounds like my understanding of what subproject owner already is + * relevant subproject definition issues: + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/200](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/200) + * bob: several subprojects span many packages/folders/OWNERS files... makes it confusing to understand who runs the subproject + * dims: yes, that was the intent here, to clarify and raise visibility to subproject leadership + * cblecker: clarifying subproject owners/leadership seems like an easier next step than defining a new global term like "coordinator"; sigs can already define local roles / permissions / recognition (xref new member coordinator in contribx) + * dims: fine with any technical solution that helps solve: surfacing the people doing the work, making sure SIGs can enumerate those people's responsibilities + * derek: trying to map to initiatives sig-node did recently... needed a CI focus group; created a subproject and added folks to lead that; is that what we're looking for? + * dims: that is a good example of work being done; what was missing was visibility, recognition, ability for them to call that out to their employer; ability to clearly define/sustain those positions to let other people take them over in the future + * will continue discussion in doc/thread + * WG Policy Leadership + * cblecker: reached out to leads again, have not heard back; pursuing offline contact, but should start considering next steps, appointing interim leadership, etc + * AI: cblecker to give until end of week, then raise interim leadership topic + * [Needs Review] PSC rename to “Security Response Committee” - [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5597](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5597) + * No objection, needs +1s, also need to sweep references to make sure name is updated + * Annual Reports - “exec review” + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/202](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/202) + * Quick link to draft template: [https://hackmd.io/R7hFEhc4SrOvaBl_vJDhEg](https://hackmd.io/R7hFEhc4SrOvaBl_vJDhEg) + * Target date: before kubecon, ideally 4/26, definitely by end of April + * AI: + * all: review template + * liaisons: ping trailing sigs (draft PRs due 3/8, final PRs due 4/8) + * derek/dims: sig-arch + * others...? + +## March 1, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: dims +* Note Taker: Christoph Blecker +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * ~~Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita)~~ + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Awesome Community Members in Attendance: + * Kendall Nelson + * Alison Dowdney + * Eric Duen + * Lauri Apple + * Emilien Macchi +* Topics + * [Lauri Apple] Driving adoption of process/workflow guide, program manager role, and other related improvements ([see Slack thread](https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CPNFRNLTS/p1613581175028300)) + * draft of [process/workflow resource](https://github.com/LappleApple/community/blob/master/contributors/chairs-and-techleads/process-workflow-guide.md) + * [dims] where is this coming from? How does the program manager role add value? + * [lauri] guide is meant to be tools for other folks to start a program manager type role + * [lauri] allows for continuity in leadership (folks able to move on); has had benefits in sig-release... stephen has been able to articulate vision doc and delegate nuts and bolts implementation of that vision + * [paris] Can we talk about the differences between this and a chair + * [lauri] in sig-release, chairs are defining vision, and this frees them up to do more of that + * [jordan] perhaps be more explicit about that the tasks of this doc are important to sigs. Not all sigs may need an explicit PM role; whether these responsibilities are made more explicit in the chair role or split into a separate optional role, these tools and examples are good to give sigs + * [christoph] +1 to giving sigs examples/toolkit; + * [jordan] describing chair tasks as "running meetings and administrivia" makes it sound like the job consists of unimportant or busywork items. I think it's important to recognize the importance of what chairs do in organizing the sig and helping drive processes to carry out the technical vision and direction, and either clarify specific responsibilities of that role or split out an optional program manager role that can be done by the same person as a chair in smaller sigs. + * [bob] We do go over SHOULD, MAY, MUST etc in the chair description + * [derek] PM role might be tied to subprojects based on size of subprojects + * [lauri] Proposal is for SIG PMs to be optional role, based on their circumstances and unique needs. It’s generally a way to gain visibility for the activities, recruit new contributors to load-balance, and ensure PM work isn’t second-class citizen. Also want to encourage supportive time management for current SIG leads—ie how do we want to help leads spend their time doing the most valuable work for them, given their skillset? + * Broad support from steering members for Lauri as sig-release chair as roles are currently defined + * AI: clarify chair role definition to include these responsibilities, or the PM type role should be split out + * Decide whether the chair role captures the specific responsibilities + * If so, are current chairs meeting those responsibilities? + * If not, should those be made more explicit in the chair role or captured in a designated role? + * Consider applicability to sigs of different sizes/types + * [christoph] Request from wg-policy around leadership inactivity + * Christoph to reach out to leads between now and next steering meeting, get their input on whether the working group should continue or dissolve + * OpenStack TC joining us :) + * [https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/kubernetes-cross-community-topics](https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/kubernetes-cross-community-topics) + * [2020-08-03 Distributed Project Leadership](https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20200803-distributed-project-leadership.html) (relevant to previous program manager role discussion) + +## February 22, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Jordan Liggitt +* Note Taker: Bob Killen +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * ~~Christoph Blecker (@cblecker)~~ + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics + * Community meeting next steps from Governance perspective [bob] + * Overall consensus from leads (from chair and TL meeting) is the monthly meeting is not useful, and would prefer to make it more discussion focused. Feedback from ContribEx discussion has largely been the same. + * If we take off the community meeting, we need a mechanism to ask them to do some community update and what can count for it (do one report at a KubeCon) [Paris] + * We should have some mechanism so people can ask questions [liggitt] + * [Draft doc of inputs and outputs and what are desired from them](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UP4zOZOFxiwE5J98y0f-LorrPztadPvg-wfYrS0DjRA/edit#gid=0) [Paris] + * Regarding making the community meeting more discussion focused - the agenda would need to be curated and topics should be applicable to the broad community [liggitt] + * Reviews on wg annual reports [liggitt] + * lgtm from two steering members? Majority? + * paris: inconsistent involvement of sig (some chairs copied sigs on the PR, some involved in editing, some just wrote and opened the PR). opinion: liaison has lgtm, would be good to be consistent in involving the community. + * Decision: steering liaison has lgtm+approve, once lgtm, send annual report to sig/wg list and cc steering for comment and feedback before merge + * Follow up items: + * Date for next CoCC sync, transparency item to agenda + * thread started to pick date/time for next meeting, item on agenda + * Need to think about how we engage and do our outreach for better representation + * Engage with CNCF on DI consultant + * codify and write up a punch list for projects that have been moved to maintenance mode + * Slack-admins should write up when / what action will be taken for violations better. ([Tracking Issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/5541)) + * Derek to follow up with the sig-networking folks about revitalizing one of the sub projects, what the choices are etc. + +## February 1, 2021 [Public Meeting] + +* Bosun: Paris Pittman +* Note Taker: +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Awesome Community Members in Attendance: + * Kendall Nelson (@kendallnelson / diablo_rojo) + * Lachie + * Ihor +* Topics: + * Meeting Cadence + * Community Meeting + * There isn’t a happy here with 37 groups and a monthly meeting; at least 4 groups update + release + other sections. Groups are giving 2-3 community meeting udpates a year. + * KubeCon updates - at least two a year + * SIG / Community group meeting governance + * Once every 3 weeks + * Folks also have office hours and other ad hoc collaboration + * Supporting async comms + * Do we need face to face meetings? + * What does an alternate look like? + * Using the mailing list as an option instead of face to face + * More folks from india and other areas/TZ that are not PT :) + * [jordan] doesn't want groups to turn it into a broadcast-out-only mechanism + * [derek] Does not having an agenda a sign that there are other things going on? + * Example: working groups - have they hit their time? + * [kendall] Openstack has meeting bots, agenda, etc in IRC - could we do this for slack? + * [christoph] doesn’t feel comfortable dropping them completely but wants some kind of time cadence guardrail like monthly, quarterly + * [dims] wants to experiment + * Dims is signing up for this :) + * [Discussion from ContribEx](https://groups.google.com/g/kubernetes-sig-contribex/c/4yzdXsRRZGA/m/ol5F6RkhDwAJ) + * Annual Report Check in [5 mins max] + * Everyone meet / discuss the process with your groups? Should we extend the deadline? + * Christoph - need one more month; april meeting + * Dims, nikhita, bob + * Jordan - can we do what docs does for release notes draft PRs; need to have a draft PR up just to keep it flowing + * Follow up: ^^ that is the end result + * Christoph - did you still want to automate the creation of the issue for each annual report + * Other outstanding business, issues, or comments here? + * Paris to do a draft email to kdev and leads@ for steering review TODAY + * Follow up on ingress nginx maintainer [10 mins max] + * Christoph needs to follow up; Derek needs to connect + * Follow up on demographic questions for Annual Contributor Survey [5] + * Cocc - we should engage with cncf about a dei consultant or work more at that level + * Privacy guarantees came up as well in the discussion + * Nikhita - what would it involve to engage with cncf on this? + * Ihor - start with servicedesk ticket to get the convo going + * Dims - i think we should lead the way + * Dims - we should still think of activities to help improve while we look at survey/getting data options + * Paris - +1 + * Christoph - engaging with cncf is worthwhile + * Thinks a prefer not to answer should be good + * We already do some anon scrubbing before the data goes live anyway + * If we delay on this, we are waiting another year to make moves on these efforts + * Jordan - formulating what we are wanting to know and why + * Ball is in our court there + * Describe what we want to be able to compare year over year + * Nikhita - not sure why this would take a year + * Definitely start the process + * Bob - maybe we do the survey mid year + * +1 + * Derek - +1 to Jordan + * CNCF / TOC / GB updates [2] + * Next GB is April + * Voting today for TOC seat + * Gsuite update for CoCC secure shared drive + * Bob filed; anyone of the sc1, sc2, sc3 + * Bob button + * [LFX Mentoring open for 2021](https://github.com/cncf/mentoring/issues/317) + * KubeCon Maintainer Track session? [2 mins] + * Christoph - due soon, do we want to do anything? + * Last year we did a virtual panel and then a project update in Q3?4? + * We also have a project update + * Bob - maybe ama? + * Nikhita - no opinion + * Jordan - no opinion + * Derek - no opinion + * Dims - no opinion + * Christoph - in person amas are good, but we have a monthly opportunity for the community to ask steering questions (this meeting), so virtual AMA is maybe of questionable benefit? + * [community] - agree with folks about amas + * Paris - will take the action + * https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues + +## January 18, 2021 [Private Meeting] + +* Bosun: Jordan Liggitt +* Note Taker: Jordan Liggitt +* Steering Committee Attendees: + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * ~~Derek Carr (@derekwaynecarr)~~ + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) + * Nikhita Raghunath (@nikhita) + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Topics: + * 2020 WG report wrap-ups + * [Jordan] Please remember to check in with your wg to have them PR the report into the repo + * 2021 SIG/WG report process [updates](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5388) + * Bob/Jordan comments mostly addressed + * AI: + * Open questions: + * "About you" liaison/1-on-1: per group? chairs individually? chairs and TLs individually? + * Paris: meeting individually is a large number, but is only yearly... individual meetings allow folks to raise topics that might be difficult in a group setting. Any thoughts on how to scale this to make sense? + * Dims: maybe start with group meetings, liaison follow-up with individual meetings if it seems warranted + * Jordan: I like that, would also explicitly let chairs/TLs know they can reach out to their liaison for a 1-on-1 if they would like + * Nikhita: is this throughout the year or trying to do it before annual report is submitted? + * Paris: not necessarily accompanying reports, but would like to see it happen early in the year + * Jordan: +1, not blocking annual report on it, but doing it early + * Bob: +1, any issues might also be fresh on their mind after compiling the annual report + * AI: Paris will update PR to clarify + * Paris: how to raise community awareness of the annual reports? sent an email to k-dev last year, but certain it was lost/ignored + * Bob: as a data point, in the leads meeting, many were not aware this was a thing and was imminent. Suggest opening an issue per group and assigning to the leads, their PR with the report can close the issue. + * Paris: individual issues or umbrella with checklist? + * Bob: suggest individual so the report PRs can close them + * AI (Christoph): easily scripted if we want to automate report issues assigned to leads. + * Christoph: are we asking WGs that just filed a 2020 report to report again? + * Paris: no, 2020 WGs shouldn't have to repeat themselves. could document or link to their 2020 reports (and WGs submitting reports now could title them 2021) + * Nikhita: can we move liaison assignments to sigs.yaml? will keep it up to date + * Bob: +1 + * Jordan: +1 + * Paris: +1 + * Christoph: +1, let's remove the data from liaisons doc and link to the canonical location + * ~~AI (nikhita): add to sigs.yaml, link from liaisons.md~~ + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5415](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5415) + * Website banner approval mechanism [implemented](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/25769) + * + * BLM banner expiring + * steering committee approved the BLM banner staying up through the end of 2020 when it was restored after kubecon NA + * (paris was -1) + * dims: can we keep the announcements text and the dates it was up in the announcements source, so it is browseable/searchable, even though it is no longer rendered on the website because it expired? + * yes, several +1s on adding history to the source + * ~~AI (jordan): set up announcements source containing announcements/dates posted in 2020 -~~ [https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/26149](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/26149) + * AI (bob): transcribe Christoph statement on community values + * What are the areas where we want to see continued progress in underrepresented groups? + * Paris: OWNERS files + * Dims: go back to funnel perspective. To increase representation of underrepresented groups at the leadership level, we need to work from the top. Increase the number of folks interested in the technology, increase the number of folks attending kubecon, increase the number of folks getting into the community (communitybridge/gsoc/outreachy), get a bunch of them into reviews, approvers and finally sig TL’s or chairs. + * Bob: Annual survey could give us insight into where people are in the ladder + * AI (bob): Looking into adding background to annual community survey. Language will require sign off from CNCF. + * CNCF has given the go ahead and will supply language they use from Kubecon registration + * [SIG Release has a charter update](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5409) + * Ingress-nginx maintainer update + * primary maintainer stepping down + * AI (christoph): networking liaison (derek) check with networking leads on next steps, if transfer is being handled + * Wg-component standard - follow up in slack + * [nikhita] FYI need to follow up on election retro items + * ~~AI (nikhita): will post tracking issues for AIs in slack~~ diff --git a/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2022-meeting-notes.md b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2022-meeting-notes.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..1b58fee1 --- /dev/null +++ b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2022-meeting-notes.md @@ -0,0 +1,1434 @@ +## December 19, 2022 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Ben Elder (@bentheelder) +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Carlos Tadeu Panato Jr. (@cpanato) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Nabarun Pal (@palnabarun +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* [Bob] KubeCon EU Session + * Standard simple K8s SC panel is not appropriate for KubeCon in terms of panel representation, raised in Detroit, now formally part of the CFP and maintainers track panels + * We will not tokenize anybody by simply asking them to participate in response to the program committee suggest of changing the panel _membership_ + * Could shift the _topic_, ie: not just panel of “SC members speaking” versus panel of “Current governance trends and changes compared to the past across projects” + * We can’t ad hoc change the structures of our sitting committees, but we do need to foster a more inclusive Steering Committee membership ahead of 2023 election +* [Christoph] Workflow / ContribEx idea to float for maintainers: a label for OWNERS file PRs for easier triage and dashboarding to keep eyes on tracking conversation to completion +* [Bob] Due for a next quarterly sync with K8s CoCC in January +* Cancel Jan. 2, 2023 Steering Committee meeting +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? +* [end of meeting] bosun? + + +## December 5, 2022 [Public Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Bob Killen + +**Note taker**: Tim Pepper + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Ben Elder (@bentheelder) +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Carlos Tadeu Panato Jr. (@cpanato) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Nabarun Pal (@palnabarun +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Arnaud Meukam +* Noah Abrahams + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* Welcome Carlos! +* [Bob] Annual Reports + * [Tools updates](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6357#issuecomment-1336320564) req’d? + * Overall theme: need to make this easier, more templated for consistency/completeness + * ContribEx shadow cohort is starting some work here, Christoph Blecker is leading push on this + * Need issues and template PRs, may need a code change if the generator is to be run in 2022 for 2023 + * AI SC members: review the annual reports [retro](#bookmark=id.yeoum670jlxc) for potential points of update to the template questions: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/242](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/242) + * Annual Report Retro: + * [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X7rQx4rC9FbpdLMI5C8FY9j4TmeH2m1aKy_i4kemHXo/edit](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X7rQx4rC9FbpdLMI5C8FY9j4TmeH2m1aKy_i4kemHXo/edit) + * [Liaisons](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/liaisons.md): + * Time for liaisons to ping SIGs/WGs + * Re-shuffle liaisons or new SC members just take on prior members’? Let’s keep it simple, [Carlos takes on Paris’ spot](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/commit/c5fa26a3ba44445b2bbbab5c31ca097a02250a27) + * Timeline: + * Definitely would like to be done by KubeCon EU (3rd week of April 2023) + * Need buffer for SC to collate all parts into one report. End of March-ish target for SIGs/WGs? + * Pitch to leads that having reports done is part of what they can use in their maintainers track talks + * If goal is completion in March, work by leads in February/March means tooling changes need done ASAP on tight timeline +* Signing MacOS binaries [Arnaud] + * Renewing question from [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/30](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/30) + * Paris had been looking at Apple + * Knative/Mohammed/SIGRelease has some prior work on this, might have been prior to CNCF though, maybe Google helped on it? + * [https://developer.apple.com/programs/enroll/](https://developer.apple.com/programs/enroll/) has individual vs organization info. Org account needs to be a “legal entity”. Kubernetes does not meet the requirement and probably can’t itself + * As per [https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/main/charter.md](https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/main/charter.md) point 2.d.i “The foundation seeks to offer up a fully integrated and qualified build of each of the constituent pieces, on a well-defined cadence across the reference architecture.” Reasonable next level of maturation for CNCF to have a signing service. +* Minikube is interested in enabling opt-in telemetry + * Complicated, don’t want to steward data, whoever is must comply with regulations + * K8s infra has some similar work related to the registry, probably “ii” did a PII review of telemetry, link [https://registry.k8s.io/privacy](https://registry.k8s.io/privacy) + * LF Policies: + * Telemetry specific: [https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/telemetry-data-policy](https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/telemetry-data-policy) + * Privacy generic: [https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/privacy-policy](https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/privacy-policy) + * Additional other (eg: GDPR) compliance requirements + * If we do this route, where is the data to be stored, what mechanism controls access? Do we want to go this route as an open source project? Can of worms, deep rabbit hole… + * Project has had previous telemetry in [https://github.com/kubernetes-retired/spartakus](https://github.com/kubernetes-retired/spartakus), but it has been archived/retired because it was unused + * There is precedent in open source for collecting info on usage patterns to inform the project’s development roadmaps. Goal of stats of versions, drivers, etc. is more easily distinguished from PII. Goal is not anywhere near tracking humans, versus the installed codebase and useful features. Still have identifiers of some sort (eg: for validation, deduplication, …) + * Does CNCF have any mechanism today standardized for projects? AI: open service desk ticket to inquire on status of existing tools + * What about timing out, purging data? User request for removal of their data? + * Is there a pre-approved third party route (eg: Google Analytics)? + * LFX has a project portal aimed at perhaps this type of project level analytics, and they must already manage PII +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? +* [end of meeting] bosun? + + +## November 21, 2022 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Bob Killen + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* ~~Ben Elder (@bentheelder)~~ +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* ~~Nabarun Pal (@palnabarun)~~ +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* 2022 year-end annual reports + * Stay the course? + * Update/revise process (and tools)? + * Timeline? + * Update liaisons list… +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? +* [end of meeting] bosun? + + +## November 7, 2022 [Public Meeting] (recording) + +**Bosun**: Bob Killen + +**Note taker**: Tim Pepper + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Ben Elder (@bentheelder) +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* ~~Christoph Blecker (@cblecker)~~ +* Nabarun Pal (@palnabarun) +* ~~Paris Pittman (@parispittman)~~ +* ~~Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus)~~ +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Kendall Nelson + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* No SC quorum +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? +* [end of meeting] bosun? + + +## October 17, 2022 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Christoph Blecker + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Ben Elder (@bentheelder) +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Nabarun Pal (@palnabarun) +* ~~Paris Pittman (@parispittman)~~ +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* [cblecker] Discussion on statement around equality +* [tpepper] Recap of joint meeting with CoCC +* [all] misc onboarding discussion, context sharing, administrivia + + +## October 3, 2022 [Public Meeting] (recording) + +**Bosun**: Christoph Blecker + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) - continuing +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims) - outgoing~~ +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) - outgoing +* ~~Paris Pittman (@parispittman)~~ +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) +* Ben Elder (@bentheelder) - incoming +* Nabarun Pal (@palnabarun) - incoming + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Noah Abrahams +* Rey Lejano +* Kaslin Fields (@kaslin) +* Antonio Ojea +* Ben Elder +* Nabarun Pal +* Ian Coldwater + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* **[cblecker] 2022 Steering Committee Election Results** + * Bob Killen + * Nabarun Pal + * Ben Elder + * Thank you to Kaslin, Noah, Dims for running the election! + * Election retrospect coming soon (tomorrow?), [doodle poll](https://doodle.com/meeting/participate/id/bkZn335a), discussion [doc](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q5jdCAWfRIWK08POymFuoqS4BY2bSfRFxAQSk5xpvx8/edit) +* [cblecker] Steering AMAs: main conference session, and contributor summit + * KubeCon is three weeks away! + * Would like Bob, Nabarun, Ben at these two sessions if planning already to attend +* [liggitt] need an issue/template for onboarding ben/nabarun, offboarding dims/liggitt + * template: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/operations/onboarding.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/operations/onboarding.md) + * example: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/219](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/219) + * Stephen can create, new folks will drive completion + * Opened: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/256](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/256) +* [Kendall] OpenInfra Foundation was having a f2f the week before KubeCon, our Steering members were invited. This has shifted to virtual, we’re still invited, ping Kendall for link to participate +* [Nabarun] Will be stepping down from CoCC as of SC election: + * SC needs to pull in the next available candidate, Tim will lead + * Stephen: SC has recently changed its process for its own elections, need to consider if similar makes sense for CoCC. Consequence would be holding a fresh election instead of pulling from prior elections next in line +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? + + +## September 12, 2022 [Public Meeting] (recording) + +**Bosun**: Stephen Augustus + +**Note taker**: Jordan Liggitt + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Arnaud Meukam +* Noah Abrahams +* Nabarun Pal + +**CNCF updates?** + +* KubeCon Maintainer updates + * Anything you want to highlight on the big stage? + * reply to [leads@kubernetes.io](mailto:leads@kubernetes.io) email with topics/information ASAP (link to survey in email has September 23rd deadline) + * k8s.gcr.io -> registry.k8s.io ? +* dims - four issues currently open for health checks of various projects + * stephen: would it make sense to make sure impacted sig areas are aware? e.g. sig-apps for brigade? sig-api-machinery are already aware of etcd issues. + * lag in two-way communication took longer than desired for this issue + * etcd didn't communicate clearly this behavior for single-node clusters (even some etcd maintainers were actually surprised by this) + * etcd didn't have clear communication from downstreams that this behavior was assumed to be correct + * current etcd issue has traction to be fixed, agreement in principle on backporting a fix to 3.4, 3.5 + * how can etcd tighten communication for future issues? + * christoph: + * we (k8s) are also a foundational building block for many downstreams + * what lessons can we learn about communicating better/earlier about surprising behaviors or "known" issues to our downstreams + * stephen: agree, communication around releases, blogposts communicating non-feature changes coming in releases has improved + * dims: + * consider well-known / popular / public installer default behavior and target communications + * suggestion for etcd maintainers: let major distributors/installers indicate their use to stay informed of known issues impacting them +* [https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/welcoming-pytorch-to-the-linux-foundation/](https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/welcoming-pytorch-to-the-linux-foundation/) +* Two initiatives upcoming related community safety/trust, announcements hopefully incoming soon + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* Steering Committee election is underway (voter exception requests end 2022-09-16, voting ends 2022-09-30)! ([readme](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/elections/steering/2022), [ballot](https://elections.k8s.io/app/elections/steering---2022)) +* Sponsor Developer Programs + * Developer accounts are required to ensure signatures are produced in the release process of k8s for specific operating systems. + * e.g. Apple Developer program: [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/30](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/30) + * discussed in [May meeting](#bookmark=id.kdszhzcl9bt3) + * the issue is not the money / reimbursement, the issue is tying the process to individuals + * Paris is trying to dig into it for MacOS + * Stephen will sync with Paris + * Arnaud will open umbrella issue for Windows and MacOS + * Stephen: sig-release is doing a proof of concept for getting build artifacts to stop being reliant on individuals + * Jordan: in addition to not wanting to inject individuals into artifact production critical paths, we don't want to tie historical project artifact signatures to individuals in ways where future accidents on an individual account could result in invalidation/revocation of project artifacts + * Christoph: in addition to technical aspects, developer agreements are contracts and we need to make sure Kubernetes/CNCF is the party involved in the account being used to sign, not a release manager personal account; would suggest not lumping windows/mac issues into an umbrella, keep them separate since resolution will likely be independent + * Arnaud: what is the next step? + * Christoph: macos issue is open, paris/stephen have next step to figure out how a non-personal account can be obtained; need a separate new issue for windows/microsoft if that signing is needed + * Dims: update on the CDN image registry effort. we did a proof of concept on cloudflare fronting the image registry; on pause for the moment, feel like we should also do a proof of concept on alternate providers + * arnaud: personal feeling is that we should move on from cloudflare. we do want to use a CDN. we tried to reach out to fastly and weren't able to make contact + * dims: fastly is on my TODO, via ChrisA + * Christoph: if we're back to a vendor selection / POC stage, should we bring the list of requirements to CNCF? + * dims: we sort of know what we want, trying to validate approach will function properly before crafting a formal list of requirements + * Christoph: once we have the technical requirements, could be worth a call for vendors that can meet those requirements to make sure we don't overlook an option, especially if there's a CNCF member that could meet those requirements more affordably + * dims: FYI, cloud provider credits program ([https://cncf.io/credits](https://cncf.io/credits)) is not yet active + * arnaud: needed to consider CDN providers who partner with google ([https://cloud.google.com/network-connectivity/docs/cdn-interconnect](https://cloud.google.com/network-connectivity/docs/cdn-interconnect)) because current artifacts are google-hosted + * stephen: need to clarify whether the list of providers at ^ is the pool we have to choose from or not +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? +* [end of meeting] bosun? + * TBD on Steering results/schedule + * jk, it’s Christoph for October! + +## August 14, 2022 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Tim Pepper + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* ~~Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables)~~ +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* ~~Paris Pittman (@parispittman)~~ +* ~~Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus)~~ +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* **[private]** CNCF CoCC WG update [Christoph] +* Steering Election [dims] + * Schedule merged last week: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6760](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6760) + * Today due for “Announcement of Election and publication of voters.md”: voter roles pulled last Friday. + * TBD in next 2 weeks: + * candidate call so folks can have Q&A around the role + * Consider scheduling 2x for timezones +* K8s CoCC election update [Tim] + * Newly elected: + * Danielle Lancashire + * Hilliary Lipsig + * Xander Grzywinski + * Jeremy Rickard (Vallery stepped down additionally, after election) + * CoCC is working to onboard folks + * Joint meeting this week or next +* KubeCon NA Oct. 24-28, 2022: + * Contrib summit presence? Bob is involved in planning, it’s early days still + * AMA in main program: + * need to define speakers/content (beyond the audience asking questions): Dims, Jordan, Bob won't be there as SC members, add additional names in [https://sched.co/182Pc](https://sched.co/182Pc) this week + * Oct. 3 is our election results announce, hopefully newly elected will be at KubeCon +* GB Updates [Paris? Dims?] + * Upcoming meetings on legal committee and follow ups after Valencia +* Etcd update? + * Dims pinged recently for update + * Marek (Google) is primary person left maintaining + * Clarifying moves (or have moved?) inactive maintainers to emeritus to show the shortness of the list + * Drafting position statement on new feature working being ~ on hold + * Have discussed the cloud credits program with folks (some past jepsen testing was on a personal bill on AWS?) + * Jordan: stabilizing and communicating, is there more we can do to spread the word on needs? + * Dims: partly blocked lately on Marek being on holiday in August + * Jordan: at what point does this need an escalation to CNCF ToC for broader call for help? + * Dims: has happened, but currently hoping on some face to face in Detroit to convince folks of the need + * Jordan: will reach out to Marek to see what support he could need + * …at what point do we abstract crisply to try to enable a potential switch to something well maintained? That only helps us, not all the other dependents on etcd. + * Where are the RedHat experiments on crdb? + * …or pull into k8s proper to fully support? Still no people for that. + + +## August 1, 2022 [Public Meeting] (recording) + +**Bosun**: Christoph Blecker + +**Note taker**: Tim / Jordan + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* ~~Paris Pittman (@parispittman)~~ +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* David Eads +* Rey Lejano +* Danielle +* Kendall Nelson +* Seth Jennings +* Lubomir +* Daniel Smith + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* bosun for next times: + * Aug 15 (private) - TimP + * Sept. 5 (public) - Stephen Augustus + * Sept. 19 (private) - Stephen Augustus +* [Bob] Election schedule review: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6760](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6760) + * targeting merge by 8/5 + * AI: steering review/comment early this week +* [Kendall Nelson] Any Steering Committee members interested in attending the next OpenStack PTG meeting Oct. 17-20 [https://openinfra.dev/ptg/](https://openinfra.dev/ptg/) + * driving distance from Detroit :) + * early-bird pricing through 8/15 +* [cblecker] CoCC election update – TimP + * Dates + * August 4th - Nominations close ([https://forms.gle/4LPrENt1roTfG5Q8A](https://forms.gle/4LPrENt1roTfG5Q8A)) + * can nominate yourself or someone else + * nominees can be outside the community ([eligibility guidelines](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-code-of-conduct/election.md#eligibility-for-candidacy)) + * August 5th - Steering to hold election + * August 6-7th - Steering to confirm with candidates and announce results + * Have 3 openings and 3 folks nominated so far; would like more in order to have future backups if needed +* [dims] can Christoph give an update on the CNCF-level CoCC progress? + * Feedback process underway on defining the bootstrapping and permanent bodies + * future election for members of the permanent committee + * Dates (details in thread at [https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-kubernetes-maintainers/message/288](https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-kubernetes-maintainers/message/288)) + * ~~Self-nomination period - June 23 to July 11~~ - COMPLETE + * [Voter opt-in period](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScguua9zdH1drcHGJcu_okGgw5pXofQIcCCdnZ7jJ30je_qrw/viewform) for the approvers list- July 18 to August 1 at 12 PM PT + * Candidates will be announced on August 2 + * Ballots will be sent on August 2 + * Voting period - August 2 to August 11 at 12 PM PT + * Election results announced on August 11 +* [Paris? GB updates?] +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? + +## July 18, 2022 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Christoph Blecker + +**Note taker**: Jordan + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* [paris] ask v discussion: liaisons, can you ask your chairs and TLs what mentoring programs they are involved in for more reviewers+? Contributor ladder mentoring is awesome. Example: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6665](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6665) - cli and apps are looking for more reviewers; this is not a program for new contributors + * Chairs and tech leads should not be mentors; this work should be delegated + * Annual reports made it clear ~every group is looking for more reviewers/approvers, but that isn't matched by mentoring programs + * paris: if people wanting to start up a mentoring effort need pointers, paris can be a resource if they want to reach out + * cblecker: agree with conclusions / need for this, and that mentoring programs are a good way to do this… is this steering or contribx? + * paris: from contribx perspective, need help + * cblecker: if chairs/tls don't have capacity to do the mentoring, what are we asking them to do? + * paris: ask chairs/tls to ask subproject owners to be mentors + * AI for liaisons: remind chairs/TLs to ask subproject owners about mentoring (not for chairs/TLs to take this on themselves, but to delegate). Highlight contribx/paris as resource for folks wanting to start a mentoring effort. + * Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) + * Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) + * Davanum Srinivas (@dims) + * Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) - done 7/19 + * Paris Pittman (@parispittman) + * Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) + * Tim Pepper (@tpepper) +* [paris] etcd - how do we make sure they get the support they need? + * paris: they need a senior community engineer direly; no onboarding programs and need more building of contributor documentation and videos + * paris: published maintainers list isn't accurate, needs cleanup to reflect active maintainers to make it more clear what the current state is; feedback from GB has been confused because the published maintainers list looks like there is plenty of support + * dims: have a contributor (benjamin) from vmware side, doing good work, helping with release, but not currently a senior contributor; another 2 contributors from AWS expected to show up in 2-3 weeks from now, once they free up from internal work. + * tpepper: can we coordinate conversation around this at kubecon / contrib summit? + * bob: has an etcd status update been presented to the GB? + * paris: no, not yet + * paris: should we ask CNCF for joint meeting with actionable next steps? has been six months without much movement + * dims: dev reps should request time to talk specifically about this +* [paris] steering committee election: by the end of july we need to - + * Select the voter eligibility - 50 contributions? Same as last year? + * Confirm committee members and named roles will be auto-in - make sure all PRs and changes are in for this + * Exceptions: does exception basis voting eligibility lead also to ability to run for role? Can exceptions be moved to formal voting eligibility requirements? Is this a problem (ie: how many exceptions are happening)? + * Confirm officer selections from josh + * initial selections made, not yet presented to steering? + * Make any last minute changes to election policy and procedure? + * Do you need to be an eligible voter to stand for election? + * same question raised in [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/227](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/227), discussed in a public meeting at / [recording of discussion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEi47H7_Bxo&t=1306s) + * stephen and paris and TimP: +1 + * stephen: if we do this, should look at the common exception scenarios and try to fold those into official eligibility rules so that exceptions are not required for most of the people who would be voting / running (+1 from Jordan, mixing judgment call exceptions as a gate to candidate eligibility seems problematic) + * ran out of time on this topic, will continue discussion async and resolve before end of July + * Figure out the GB alt situation so we can implement that this round + * Should it alt every election for primary and alt seat? + * Should all members including emeritus / no matter the term limit be included? +* [paris] cocc election: by the end of July we need to - + * Make sure all election policy and procedure reflects the reality we are in and the future we want to go to + * Start the nomination process from Chairs and Tech Leads first and then open up to the wider community + * Example of wider community: [https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/d/msgid/steering/CADPpvp1SzFYJDR%3DZqdyOLNdZqZmYm193vVfEkVzBbvRfv0hJJA%40mail.gmail.com](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/d/msgid/steering/CADPpvp1SzFYJDR%3DZqdyOLNdZqZmYm193vVfEkVzBbvRfv0hJJA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer) + * Chairs and TLs comms: ASAP + * Dev and Steering: 3-5 days after Chairs and TLs comms + * [paris] funding: 4 out of 5 issues need responses from us + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues) +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? +* [end of meeting] bosun? + + +## July 7, 2022 [Public Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Christoph Blecker + +**Note taker**: dims + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Jeremy Rickard +* Jason DeTiberus +* Bridget Kromhout +* David Eads +* Kirsten Garrison +* Tim Hockin +* Keith Mattix +* Chris Short +* Madhav Jivrajani +* Mike Morris +* Josh Berkus +* Nabarun Pal +* Priyanka Saggu + +**CNCF updates?** + +* [paris] GB updates [5 minutes] + * We have short term and long term needs+goals at governing board right now + * Legal committee and/or legal matters + * New legal committee spun up + * Made up of folks on GB (and their legal folks) + * Proposing the opt-in legal private list next time they meet + * Similar to ASF’s legal-private mailing list + * Waiting on answers to questions from d&o insurance ask + * [https://github.com/cncf/foundation/issues/329](https://github.com/cncf/foundation/issues/329) + * Legal fund resolution: Need to get details from cra and others; maybe have this? + * Use general funds? + * Need to create/define a process + * [“Real Name” / Pseudonym issue](https://github.com/cncf/foundation/issues/383) + * Relates to DCO, are real names required, what even is a real name + * Special issues committee + * Good news! There is a process (yay!) + * Everything needs to start at servicedesk before going to board - even the ambiguous/large scale/high level strategy asks and questions + * Will submit servicedesk tickets for SIGs with descriptive needs for more reviewers, etc + * Decision making process has been defined + * Resolution update for community of practice for managers of contributors/maintainers + training for participation in cloud native communities: set servicedesk ticket; amye+chris likes the idea and can fund from general bucket + * CoC Community of Practice may be staffed this way + * Working on creative staffing fund with group + * Fellows, contractors, and arrangements that can move the project forward in areas that are needed + * Introduce an alternate [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/218](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/218) for Kubernetes GB representative + * Most all reps do already have an alt, Kubernetes is 1 of 2 w/o + * Important to have alt. for continuity and bringing up next people, also people sometimes do have to miss meetings. + * Kubernetes does have good representation between Paris and Dims, but Dims will roll off + * [Stephen] Choose staggered term alternate members + * The alt. is a non-voting member, but can proxy for the regular + * Paris is +1 as proposer, dims, bob, jordan, christoph indicated +1 in the meeting +* [paris] FYI only contributor kubecon ticket and/or travel fund service desk ticket filed [2 minutes] + * CNCF folks will start to work on this post break + * Includes leads ask for give-away recognition tickets & shwag + * Many refs but this one is an oldie: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/109](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/109) + * Not on track for resolution ahead of KCCNCNA22, but we’ll keep pushing on it + +**Votes** + +* [stephen] [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/249](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/249) [10 minutes] + * No-op PR for reorganization with elections, vacancies, and changes + * Christoph, Dims, Jordan, Stephen, Bob, Paris, TimP - +1’s + +**Topics** + +* [paris] elections update [5 minutes] + * Josh Berkus from ContribEx: + * creation of election subproject: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6720](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6720) + * Support elections for non-steering leadership roles across the community + * Need additional volunteers for election officers + * Dims is rolling off of steering, will help. + * Target is chosen election officers with draft election schedule submitted by end of July + * Feedback from SRC about elekto security. End of the month elekto will be paused to fix issues. + * No actions from steering needed until officers/schedule are submitted + * Ours / SC [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/elections.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/elections.md#eligibility-for-voting) + * Election for Code of Conduct Committee + * TimP to run the CoCC election as [liaison](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/liaisons.md) + * Please ping Josh for using elekto +* [christoph] AMA style Steering Committee session for KubeCon NA 2022 (submissions due Monday, July 11)? [3 minutes] + * stephen: will be there, in favor, normal topics plus output of annual report + * paris, dims, tim: +1 + * +1 from several community folks as the sessions being helpful. several liked the AMA style + * Will submit an AMA style discussion again + * [Bridget] Talk about behind-the-scenes + * Path to Steering? +* [Bob] [WG Proposal: Service Mesh](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6724) [15 minutes] + * [Charter Proposal](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Qt3N1RLnRom7jKNhcnNLg_xaPn0TwKGuxxgXLOguNvE/edit) + * surfacing proposal to steering + * single kubernetes stakeholder sig + * thockin: + * keith mattix: didn't want to overwhelm gateway API folks; subproject seemed a little weird because this wouldn't be owning code + * stephen: normally a working group would be across sigs and time-bounded (to completion of some project); lots of subprojects don't "own code" + * CNCF Service Mesh WG is a natural ally? [https://github.com/cncf/tag-network/tree/master/service-mesh-wg](https://github.com/cncf/tag-network/tree/master/service-mesh-wg) + * Can be an additional stream in an existing subproject and have all the infra (zoom meetings, lists, etc.) without bothering with the full on WG formality + * Christoph: not an explicit requirement to have multiple stakeholder sponsoring SIGs (see [https://github.com/cncf/tag-network/tree/master/service-mesh-wg](https://github.com/cncf/tag-network/tree/master/service-mesh-wg)) + * Mike Morris: motivation is to not be parallel to gateway api to avoid confusion on code ownership/authority. This would be focused on channeling proposals to gateway project, not owning implementation. + * TimH: we can pragmatically NACK proposal and go with simple sub-sub-project, add addl formality & structure if/when needed +* [stephen] [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/249](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/249) [10 minutes] + * No-op PR for reorganization with elections, vacancies, and changes + * Unanimous +1 vote, “/hold” removed so it can merge. +* [paris] [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/248](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/248) [20 minutes] + * Lifecycle was missing + * Added voting as a place to house abstention + * Should we take this out and put in an issue? + * stephen: summary of current state at [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/248#issuecomment-1177525893](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/248#issuecomment-1177525893) + * How do we communicate context on a no confidence vote? + * David Eads: Critical to communicate why a removal is being considered, so observers can understand what is happening. Personally wants to see how each SC member has voted on a removal. Wants to know as a community member that they have a way to feedback into choices made. Charter change process via PR is good. + * Stephen: some kind of reason is important; requiring public reasons is not good + * David: a private but trust me is not satisfying + * TimP: committees are chartered allowing private activity. Transparency and trust versus that are ongoing concerns. CoCC for example has struggled with this for years. + * Stephen: leads to bigger, scarier question of lack of trust leading to dissolution (issue link?) + * Chris Short: a no confidence vote that tells community members "just trust us" isn't likely to fly because community members don't typically know steering members personally + * Paris: detailed logging creates future harms and biases. Definitely do have public meetings and discussion (eg: this meeting has agenda, minutes, recording) + * Dims: my perspective is that the most we can do is summary text of the vote and a small description of why we don't have confidence; more details could be recorded for future steering members to review + * cblecker interjection: will prioritize folks that haven't spoken + * Kirsten: observing that by deferring some points of the PR to a later date, a merge of just some points doesn't give any indication that there were deferred or parts of the proposal slotted for later follow-up + * dims/jordan/stephen: whatever merges is the effective charter/policy + * David Eads: transparency encourages reflection on author, accountability. Antithetical to disallow that. Privacy does happen, but removal is severe and shouldn’t be allowed to skirt accountability + * TimP (replying to dims' suggestion that more details could be recorded privately): if decision log is kept, and private, what is the document retention policy? Does the private log create future biases? + * Paris (with David): What part of the current proposal is private? Could be anything today as proposed as there is no requirement to show removal is justified. Is the why about giving somebody satisfaction? What next, if there is no satisfaction received? Not necessarily about creating a public referendum gating a SC decision versus stating the reason, to which people may record their objections. + * David: proposes a reasons template (ie: transgressions list discussed in PR) + * Stephen: general consensus in SC to stating reasons. Personally against transgressions.md concept + * TimH: wants something like 100 words or less statement as described in PR. + * TODO: + * open discussion underway in the PR, comment publicly on the PR, share private comments if needed at steering-private list + * Not ready for a vote; July 27th was 4 weeks from PR creation is earliest that might happen + * Jordan: [changes.md](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/blob/main/operations/changes.md) makes it seem like 4 weeks is the *latest* it can happen: "A vote is scheduled no later than 4 weeks after initial introduction of the change." + * Jordan: it would be helpful to pick a target date for final content of the change being considered for a vote that is at least a few days ahead of the vote + + +## June 29, 2022 [Emergent Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Christoph Blecker + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Topics** + +* **Private Discussion** + + +## June 27, 2022 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Christoph Blecker + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) [2nd half only] + +**Topics** + +* **Private Discussion** + + +## June 6, 2022 [Public Meeting] ([recording](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qloe5ObSKoM)) + +**Bosun**: Tim Pepper + +**Note taker**: Dims + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* ~~Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt)~~ +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Rey Lejano +* Madhav Jivrajani + +**CNCF updates?** + +* Code of Conduct topics, following on after KubeCon: + * [https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/6999](https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/6999) + * [https://kccnceu2022.sched.com/event/12PIO](https://kccnceu2022.sched.com/event/12PIO) public, not recorded though + * Also there was a private meeting between CNCF and K8s, this was streamed to some folks but not recorded + * A CNCF working group is to be formed, details TBD + * WG will define how a CoCC will be formed and how it will operate +* CNCF Board Town Hall this week (with K8s and other project leads) + * Paris will be leading this + * How GB interacts with the projects and how does it interact with other CNCF entities +* GB Elected seat for TOC is now open for a replacement for Cornelia Davis (Thanks Stephen!) + * Deadline is tomorrow for nominations +* Paris and Stephen are working on formalizing CNCF Travel Fund especially where our existing Kubernetes Maintainers/Community Members have had need + * Example release team members will qualify + * Trying to get done ahead of Detroit +* [add them here] + +**Votes** + +* Yay! Nothing needs voting upon :) + +**Topics** + +* YAY! Annual Report: + * [https://www.cncf.io/reports/kubernetes-annual-report-2021/](https://www.cncf.io/reports/kubernetes-annual-report-2021/) + * [https://kubernetes.io/blog/2022/06/01/annual-report-summary-2021/](https://kubernetes.io/blog/2022/06/01/annual-report-summary-2021/) + * [tim] It is getting eyeballs, conversations are starting + * PARIS FOR THE WIN!!! + * [Bob] How can we make this sustainable? + * [paris] will die on the vine if we don’t automate this and have to have liaisons pull things needed from groups. +* K8s CoCC election process to start in July… + * [tim] Need to get the ball rolling. Need to cleanup our election process +* KubeCon observations? + * 121 COVID test positives reported, or 1.7% of attendance + * [tim] Quarter of staff were sick(?) on friday so there was no lunch? + * 7500 people, it felt like a KubeCon again + * Good presentations, good hallway track + * Small events feel better, how can we do that again? + * 140 people for contributor summit (possibly 110 attended) + * Air travel was crappy for a lot of folks in this event + * Post-event has been really quiet. + * Sustainability / Reliability discussion was good + * Track bugs better (triage accepted + kind bug): devstats needs updated for the new “triage accepted” label + * Need a carrot to get people to use triage accepted + * Get going on mentoring programs + * Code coverage reporting on where there are gaps in testing + * Lots of good discussion as we were not recording + * Human aspect / turn over / minimal bandwidth common topics across the week in conversations + * [paris] Mentoring, liaisoning with SIGs isn’t just new contributor, but the ladder for active people moving up in responsibility, growing people into more responsibility + * [paris] How can we use the dev list better? 1-1 does not scale for folks who need to teach as well. Need to get leads to participate better. + * [Paris] What is SIG outreach for building folks up to reviewer? + * [Paris] Tim Hockin email on go workspaces and offer to mentor folks through action + * [tim] management + project management to make projects sustainable + * [stephen] flip side of this to drag something along that was not working as well, things need to be sunset as well + * Steering members did have a dinner, most stuff talked about has already been talked about in private slack or public venues. +* Administrivia: Meeting recordings need linked to past minutes below vvvv +* Our election needs to get started and kicked up with election officers in contribex [paris] + * Dims, Jordan, and Bob have terms ending + * Dims is on last term already + * Election subproject for ContribEx: got +1, but waiting for Josh + * Need to check with Josh in case he wants to run, Dims can run it or help now too + * Backlog of coding needs? Probably resolved…? +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? + * Annual Report Summary, retro: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/242](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/242) + * Need to make it sustainable (as mentioned above) + * What can we do about sigs that had trouble writing up their PRs. + * Need folks to throw links + * How to follow up things + * Bob had to rewrite paragraphs + * Automation is needed, prompt them for exact information (mad libs!!) + * People being burnt out, could we do monthly through the leads meeting? (work on things every month and then stack it up at the year) to reduce cognitive overload + * Could we do this post-release? Jot down some quick notes. Could we file the templates earlier so folks can fill it in? + * Quarterly/Monthly sig updates at the Community Meeting was hard too, but it was easier than now? Problem was so many groups canceled and contribex had to scramble to fill in the spot. + * Opportunity for liaison should be doing, prod sigs/wgs. When the PR was filling up, liaisons helped push filling up the blanks (educators, point at direction etc). Going to sig meetings as well. Thanks Eddie!! + * Not just DM’ing, engage the SIG, be part of them. + * Question is how to distribute load. Where is the toolbox. More meetings is hard. How can we get folks to ping us instead of us pinging them. + * How to encourage durable written stuff (async!) - proposals? + * It should be just collecting existing info, but it is NOT as there are gaps. + * Automation can be run post-release can be helpful to rollup at the end of the year + * KEP website, kepctl how can we use it better + * Madhav: “Something I was thinking about that echoed with Bob and Stephen’s point - End of every release, each SIG could maybe give details in largely two folds: 1) KEP updates (this will be available readily through data maintained by the enhancements team or even through the release retro) 2) a small and minimal questionnaire, and this could be 3 questions: any new subproject?, any leadership changes?, any non-kep efforts? (Based on what the info was given in this year’s annual report)” + * So much happening, not happening in KEPs. code content is in KEPs for sure, but so many things are not (policy changes etc). + * Madhav: “I think the efforts around project boarding on gh that enhancements team is discussing could help substantially with automation as well (in case kepctl isn’t sufficient)” + * In-tree vs out-of-tree where most stuff is not happening in k/k + k/test-infra + k/release etc. How do we cover everyone. + * How to reduce work and toil? Just non-kep work will need to be added. + * Get an intern (LFX) to help with our generator, specifically for annual reports process. Need to collect a wish list. Christoph can help with mentoring (Madhav also interested to help). + * [christoph] There is value to our report (feedback from teams/people reading it). Need to be sustainable + * Several areas folks don’t think they are celebrated, we need to call efforts around this in shoutouts etc + * Tailor questions based on what info we want to put to a Board (CNCF level and our member companies) when we collect the stats. We are burying the lead, that lead will get us the help. Need to re-review the questions. Also have roles for us. Jordan helped prep us (policy docs updates etc) with Paris’ help. Steering member can be “pre-prep”. We need to write down roles and task out each person on the steering to avoid things getting lost. Also shoutouts/celebrations to community members who helped but were not leads. Folks who did multiple SIGs as well. Maintainer tooling helped as well (Thanks Madhav!). + * [Madhav] pain point for SIGs and Chairs collect data at end is a problem. Spending [bulk, trailing] time on data means other things get dropped. We could do per release thing it will help. What should the SIGs be focusing on. KEP website. How do we minimize what we miss on our data capture then we can look at non-KEP stuff which is usually more important. + * Need targeted tools for different nuggets of info. Summary is hard. + * Thanks RAY for jumping in with last minute edits. And sftim as well! +* [end of meeting] bosun? + + +## May 2, 2022 [Public Meeting] ([recording](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWfeaHYEb3g)) + +Bosun: Paris + +Note taker: Tim Pepper + +Steering: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims)~~ +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +Community folks + +* Kendall Nelson (@diablo_rojo) +* Eddie Zaneski +* Adolfo Garcia Veytia +* Patrick Ohly +* Lachlan Evenson + +**CNCF updates:** + +* [paris] starting on GB resolutions this week for + * Legal / D&O insurance, membership tiers (eg: higher tiers bring maintainers, get a discount for doing so), and more + * Eddie: wanted to ask about the resolutions; specifically about a requirement for engineering staffing resource requirements as part of membership tiers; Paris: yes, that is one of the items I'm planning to open a draft for +* [paris] Good for kubecon? Loose ends? Group is ready. +* [paris] are we good with what's in here [https://github.com/cncf/foundation/issues/329](https://github.com/cncf/foundation/issues/329)? Where do you want to see this information end up? READMEs on committee pages? Governance.md under committees? We will close this issue once we have an artifact [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/29](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/29) + * Boilerplate present + * Awaiting word from lawyers (Priyanka’s chasing down info for us) to give some clarity for volunteers in a project vs employees in a company + * Likely after KubeCon giving business ahead of it, re-ping for update after KubeCon if no update, so revisit ahead of June meeting +* Anything else from CNCF land? n/a + +**Votes:** + +* [bob] service catalog SIG archive + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6632 ](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6632) + * Bob: FYI CloudFoundry folks may be interested in some subprojects. After archival, they’d likely take a fork and carry it on. Details coming to parent issue. + +**Funding:** + +* **Contributor-Comms would like to spend $120 for a Buffer subscription to do timed tweets. Which includes tweets during Kubecon if this could be authorized this week.** +* Apple dev account [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/30](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/30) + * Final call: we would have to get CNCF to reimburse an individual as Apple doesn’t seem to have a corporate/headless option, and Apple would not consider us / CNCF a non-profit + * Risk / reward / etc? + * Goal would be curl’ing and running one of our binaries doesn’t pop a warning, but today already you can brew install and not have that warning + * Info to read up at [https://developer.apple.com/support/code-signing/](https://developer.apple.com/support/code-signing/) + * Stephen: +1 on ability to sign, -1 if only one individual can do the release then, and this means the release cannot run headless, unattended + * AI: Stephen to get answers to the unattended / multiple user aspect +* Placeholder for SIG Windows + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/31](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/31) + * remove if they want an intern; keep if they want an experienced contractor? + * [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ksvxHru2Df6w23jesnpGEdZAalZfRtjCbssMAdn7BrA/edit](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ksvxHru2Df6w23jesnpGEdZAalZfRtjCbssMAdn7BrA/edit) + * They have high need for specific Kubernetes skill, unlikely to be satisfied by just a newcomer/intern + * Ask SIG if they know of potential vendor/candidate to speed up selection + * One dev for three months is the ask, but shift to kpng and in less than one release cycle, feels like it might be under scoped, underestimate + * Any ability to decrease something in flight in the SIG to increase attention on the move? They’ve said no + * Should an “implementable” phase KEP be a requisite for going for funding like this? + * AI: Jordan to reach out to networking/windows leads (e.g. Tim/Mark) to clarify where in the design phase this is, scoping/estimates (cited 3 months is less than a single Kube release cycle, which seems too short?) - followed up on the issue +* What do we want to do with this: Alibaba funding for minikube + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/14](https://github.com/kubernetes/funding/issues/14) + * Stalled in the past for cloud credits program, which is not active…? + * Need to bump to another CNCF rep as Ihor’s currently unavailable + +**Topics** + +* Walk the annual report summary + * [https://hackmd.io/VBeH9-D_QtGv8xcEydipWA](https://hackmd.io/VBeH9-D_QtGv8xcEydipWA) + * Same question as last year: how do we handle discrepancies and no reports? + * Ideas to streamline next year + * per-group tracking issues early so they can dump ideas there + * rephrase per-group docs to make it easier to copy/paste/aggregate highlights into project report +* [topics for community] + + +## April 18, 2022 [private meeting] + +Bosun: Bob Killen + +Note taker: + +Steering: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**CNCF updates?** + +* [paris] GB Meeting + * Special Issues Committee + * Goal: sustainability resolutions for August meeting + * Legal +* [paris] kubecon loose ends? + * AMA: + * Maintainers track: + * [https://kccnceu2022.sched.com/event/ytnp](https://kccnceu2022.sched.com/event/ytnp) + * Wednesday, May 18 • 17:25 - 18:00 + * Need a 2 slide intro “who we are” + * Contrib Summit: + * Whoever can make it + * Timing flexible + * Not recorded + * Tim might be only one who can’t attend onsite for this one + * Travel and/or ticket assistance? + * Paris and Stephen working on NA-forward for a better requesting process on contributor and our ends + * Dinner placeholder sent to calendars + +**Votes** + +* [paris] can we vote on finding UGs another home within CNCF? + * Bob to open issue + +**Topics** + +* [bob] service catalog - going to talk to cloud foundry to see if they can take it + * Making connections +* [paris] annual report summary is still ticking along - take a peek at the progress and make early comments now [https://hackmd.io/VBeH9-D_QtGv8xcEydipWA?edit](https://hackmd.io/VBeH9-D_QtGv8xcEydipWA?edit) + * Missing reports: + * Node: is coming, making some last tweaks this/last week + * Networking: is coming + * Many of the groups need next steps / help: how do we document/make sure there are no balls dropped? +* [paris] windows wants a contractor and typed up the scope, reason for need, and why a contractor + * + * Next step: windows to fill out a funding issue for approval from steering, servicedesk ticket, magic (might need leads on potentially contractor entities with relevant experience) +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? +* [end of meeting] bosun? + + +## April 4, 2022 [Public Meeting] ([recording](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctiECKpqHXE)) + +**Bosun**: Bob Killen + +**Note taker**: Christoph + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Arnaud Meukam +* Rey Lejano + +**CNCF updates?** + +* GB Meeting on the 14th [paris] - need at least 10 minutes on the deck + * Go over legal + * Go over sustainability deck + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* [Bob] Retire SIG Service Catalog + * [https://groups.google.com/g/kubernetes-sig-service-catalog/c/i4MqKYWhYx0/m/MO_7sNRqAgAJ](https://groups.google.com/g/kubernetes-sig-service-catalog/c/i4MqKYWhYx0/m/MO_7sNRqAgAJ) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/go-open-service-broker-client/issues/172](https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/go-open-service-broker-client/issues/172) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/service-catalog/issues/2913](https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/service-catalog/issues/2913) + * [https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/minibroker/issues/256](https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/minibroker/issues/256) + * [Bob] Started discussion 2021Q4 to combine with apps or retire sig + * **AI:** send note to [dev@kubernetes.io](mailto:dev@kubernetes.io) indicating our intention to sunset +* [Bob] Annual Report Status + * Requires updates / pending merge + * [Bob] SIG Multicluster + * [dims] tasha mentioned she would create a PR shortly + * [Jordan] SIG Architecture + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6551](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6551) + * [Stephen] Reviewing this week + * SIG UI: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6439](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6439) + * SIG CLI: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6450](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6450) + * SIG Cloud Provider: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6489](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6489) + * [Dims] + * SIG-CL: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6458](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6458) + * Not yet open + * [Jordan] WH Multitenancy + * [Dims] sig-usability (expecting a PR today from tasha) + * [Tim] way behind on life, the universe, and everything + * Won’t land this week + * [Arnaud] SIG K8s Infra + * [paris] Will be working to get it done this week. Please reach out if you need help. +* [Bob] Steering AMA @ Contributor Summit EU + * Monday, May 16th +* [Bob] Steering Session @ KubeCon EU + * Session still lists only cblecker + * Christoph on point w/ Cody to get other SC members listed + * Follow up sent. +* [Bob] OpenStack PTG Gathering on the 8th @ 15 UTC / 8AM PT + * Notes: [https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-zed-ptg#L15](https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-zed-ptg#L15) + * Zoom: [https://zoom.us/j/96239912151?pwd=b2NLMTdQeThjdW0vMzZWV3RPRHVidz09#success](https://zoom.us/j/96239912151?pwd=b2NLMTdQeThjdW0vMzZWV3RPRHVidz09#success) + * **AI:** Christoph to add to steering calendar + * Done +* [dims] Meeting with Cloudflare later today +* [end of meeting] any topics of interest for the next Community Meeting? +* [end of meeting] bosun for next meeting? + + +## March 21, 2022 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Christoph + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* ~~Davanum Srinivas (@dims)~~ +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Votes** + +* [SC Elections: COCC members should automatically be voters](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/226) + * Follow up to clarify committees added as voters, SC will vote on the eventual PR + +**Topics** + +* Legal asks for CNCF/GB + * Put in tickets and file issues + * Approve brief + * **AI**: All SC members to review/approve by EOD +* SC at KubeCon +* Annual reports + * Super important to have this done by GB meeting - mid April + * Paris prioritizing summary this week + * Anything else? +* The new community meetings are great and we can help contribex with community wide topic ideas + * TL separation - next meeting? + * Terms for chairs + * Consider moving the meeting out of “Kubernetes” (root) and into ContribEx so more people have the ability to help manually download from zoom cloud and upload to youtube. Even if the automation is problematic, we could make it easier for humans to do the manual publish the recording closer to when it happened. +* Code dependency staffing + * Multiple past points of discussion on go modules, json.iterator, go.yaml, yaml.sync + * Recent need for more maintainers in etcd + * Do we need to work to shift staffing to specific critical deps? + * Supply chain security is a growing concern across the past year + * Need more discussion/process around choosing to add a dep? + * Jordan: last week we dropped ~12% of deps + * There is at least in k/k a strong hesitance to adding deps. Project wide though across ~300 repos, less so. + * Ask sig-arch code organization folks if any of the tooling developed there could be used by non-k/k projects + * Etcd staffing + * Issue raised to steering [insert link to mailing list post] + * TOC has been made aware of the issue as well + * Stephen: Should etcd be part of k8s? + * We are well positioned to better staff it + * How do we [k8s] feel about such a large dependency that is outside of the project’s control? + * Jordan: looped in api-machinery regarding the issue, working with api-machinery to tease apart test/bugs and features + * Paris: forward email to kdev? Try and get more eyes on it, loop in employers + + +## March 7, 2022 [Public Meeting] ([recording](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ90r4lWXTU)) + +**Bosun**: Christoph + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Rey Lejano +* Eddie Zane +* Arnaud Meukam + +**CNCF updates?** + +* Ihor is a bit busy defending his country 🇺🇦 :) + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* [Paris] Next CNCF Governing Board (GB) meeting is April and we need to request time on agenda mid-March + * Need to email Executive Director Priyanka and GB chair Arun. Paris has a meeting with them end of the month + * Sustainability is a topic we should get on their calendar + * We have a couple of docs we need to finesse and get public +* [Dims] Evaluate CDN(s) for Kubernetes releases and other artifacts ([Issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/239)) + * Binaries, system packages and images. Ownership is between google and k8s-infra folks. + * We would like to reduce cost by offloading some of these to third party folks like Cloudflare, Fastly, etc. + * Many open source projects do this already, ASF, debian, alpine etc. (and the CDNs have had these programs for years) + * Need someone to start conversation and figure out what this looks like so we don’t surprise with massive amounts of data + * Dims: opened [issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/108398) on k/k requesting stats so we have data to provide with the request + * Arnuad: this is about more than just k/k too + * Bob: both fastly and cloudflare will list project name as using their services. Do we need CNCF approval for use of the trademarked name in that way? + * Dims: with stats, will craft a proposal, go through sign-offs in the project SIGs/WGs and CNCF + * Jordan: +1 on getting stats and ack on plan from sigs (like release) before applying + * Stephen: would it make sense to leverage existing relationship? + * Arnaud: there is a pre-existing relationship between Fastly/LF + * Dims: think in terms of small reversible steps (that can be rolled back if needed… xref DNS / container registry moves from the past) + * Christoph: are there existing vendor criteria that can/should be applied here (even if the anticipated monetary cost is $0) + * Dims: since the CDNs tout their support of OSS, they may have a sort of prospectus doc on what they’d look for from the project + * Christoph: infra credits work from past gives some baseline from how we’d discussed this in the past with potential partners and how we’d scoped potential costs and how we should frame discussion + * Eddie: what’s the place for requirements gathering and vendor criteria? + * Arnaud: will start an issue to pull together req’s on trademark and marketing requirements + * Arnaud: on scale, Alpine is multiple times larger data volume that what we’d expect for our K8s project artifacts + * Christoph: scope…does it include what is today in community infra, or also what’s still on Google infra? Suggest starting with community, and improved CDN with lower cost is then incentive to move remaining to community. + * Arnaud: agree, wants to start with kops + * Stephen: lots of prior art, plans in issues and KEPs. kops is good initial candidate, but also need visibility to costs of the google infrastructure bits in order to plan accurately, and getting all the artifacts onto community infra would enable a lot of release work that is desired + * Christoph: ok then need SIG K8s Infra & Release to coordinate on scope and requirements + * Stephen: file and image promotion policy/mechanism need resolution. Deb & RPM creation is effectively a managed service today (with Google running it for signing), so full community delivery could mean incremental work/staffing required. +* [Eddie] Block of kubecon tickets for maintainers + * Tickets only (don’t need travel / hotel). + * Past CNCF said apply to Diversity Scholarship, but put a note in it saying it’s not that + * Tim: The foundation has generally felt that the individuals’ employers should pay for them, that isn’t always relevant, we need to better highlight this + * Eddie: yes, this was a grad student active in the community but not working in the field, their employer had not reason to support their ticket cost + * Dims: in the past we’ve successfully gone to Chris A direct and told story of specific needs and got tickets + * Stephen: need a workflow better than texting Chris…formalize having leads roll up structured requests to steering and steering rolls up to CNCF/Chris en bulk. + * Paris: or a form we give to lead, results route to steering. + * Dims: let’s try it for KubeCon EU and try to refine for Kubecon NA + * Jordan: if only we had a way to use computers to gather data… + * [ACTION] Stephen: has older ticket still assign, will run with it, figure out surveymonkey or something +* Annual reports [15 minutes] + * Summary working session: [https://hackmd.io/VBeH9-D_QtGv8xcEydipWA](https://hackmd.io/VBeH9-D_QtGv8xcEydipWA) + * ID themes from your groups to bubble up + * Do all help wanted items have issues? + * Do all actions from the reports have issues assigned? + * Who is helping Paris finish the draft summary to ship to editors? Stephen & Bob + * While adding content remember there’s a Terminology end section to help explain our vocabulary to newer readers + + +## Feb 28, 2022 [Private Meeting] - rescheduled from Feb 21 + +**Bosun**: Stephen + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Votes** + +* [Christoph] SIG-Instrumentation charter update: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6464](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6464) + +**Topics** + +* GB discussion + * AI: Paris to create draft +* Note to community on Ukraine + * AI: Bob to create draft + * Done: [[Please Read] An Important Note Regarding Ukraine](https://groups.google.com/a/kubernetes.io/g/dev/c/swqcTp51JsI/m/tQQyqpWSAwAJ) +* SRC Private Google Drive: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/236](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/236) + * AI: Bob to create + * Done +* Steering Committee Private Drive + * AI: Bob to create + * Done +* [Dims/Stephen] Chair/TL/maintainer bandwidth/time off +* Licensing questions + * AI: Christoph to update GitHub management documentation to reflect licensing guidance + * Done: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6502](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6502) + +## Feb 7, 2022 [Public Meeting] ([recording](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iq4n_aKhe0)) + +**Bosun**: Stephen + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Alison Dowdney +* Ihor Dvoretskyi +* Kendall Nelson +* Aldo Culquicondor + +**CNCF updates?** + +* n/a from Ihor + +**Votes** + +* WG Batch vote: [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6299](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6299) + * Technically awaiting node’s ACK, but looks to be roughly there + * SIG liaison? Let’s see after Node’s requested clarification if this ends up closer to Autoscaling, Apps, Scheduling, Node, etc., then decide + +**Topics** + +* Steering operational changes / discussion (prioritize, bumped twice) + * Roles + * ID more: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/225](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/225) + * Liaison [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/228](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/228) + * Triage [stephen] + * A few things I’ve noticed while onboarding: + * We’re not effectively using the project board (while resolved now, many of the open items for Steering were not listed on the project board) + * Stale milestones + * Several Steering issues lacking assignees + * I’ve marked a few of these w/ /help, but if it’s on the board+triaged, we should assign a point person, even if it’s something that eventually needs to be taken to vote + * [Paris] Do we need an offsite or all day meeting to get through back topics? ([from Slack](https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CPNFRNLTS/p1638484593106500?thread_ts=1638466730.104300&cid=CPNFRNLTS)) + * [Stephen] Let's see if we can spin a lightweight triage process before EOY, and then async a bunch of stuff. If we find there are still things stuck in the hopper, then maybe a triage sesh in the new year? + * [Bob] one-time initial scrub and align, then shift to sustaining async + * Should align this with election transition, which doesn’t map to normal KubeCon face-to-face. Future KubeCon’s do make sense for this. Need a catch up sooner too. + * [Paris] Do we need a decision making process for Steering? + * How do we know when something is up for a vote? Or when something has had a decent SLA to activity? How do we know when to put something on the agenda? Do community members know when to put something on the agenda? Does the boson of each meeting drive the agenda and prioritization, or do we have a shared sense of it? + * [Stephen] Add a column to the project board for “needs discussion in meeting” + * [Christoph] self-organizing has effectively spread the agenda/prioritizing focus + * Fewer concerns about abuse of bosun role + * [Bob] Items that might not have a liaison or person assigned yet should be assigned an owner to at least take them to the next step (liaison assigned etc) +* [TimP] [Election “Committee”](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/events/elections): + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6243](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6243) + * Streamlining CoCC and Steering Committee conflict of interest docs bumped into additional conflict (steering candidates shouldn’t be on election body) and the non-charted but so-named election committee. Should Election Committee be a (short term) chartered entity as a “Committee” + * Currently elections are run out of Contributor Experience, with officers approved by Steering Committee, with docs split across Steering, Community, and ContribEx. Consolidate to k/community/events/elections + * Should elections be a “Committee” or a subproject of ContribEx? [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6084](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6084) + * Is the body holding non-public information, which would mean our rules require them to be a Committee? No. Current mechanism is well anonymized. Fits as a subproject. + * TimP will update PRs to shift this to k/community, deduplicate, call elections a subproject not committee +* [Christoph] [KCEU22: Steering Committee Session](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/237) + * [Dims] Put something on the calendar + * [Christoph] To submit session, TBD Speakers +* [paris] have you talked to your groups about annual reports? + * Are there any pivots we need to do right now? + * Should be doable to get draft PRs this/next week and mergeable by end of month +* March Boson: + + +## Jan 24, 2022 [Private Meeting] + +**Bosun**: Jordan + +**Note taker**: + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**CNCF updates?** + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* FYI: wg-batch PR progressing +* Annual report next steps +* Owners files and promoting people +* workflow for CNCF legal consulations + +**Action items** + +* All: RSVP for CoCC sync dates/times +* Annual reports + * cblecker to run and check in files + * paris to open follow-up issue for generator work - [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6357](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/6357) +* All: read liaison responsibility doc (especially w.r.t. annual report responsibilities) +* ?: add password to private zoom meeting +* ?: add location for private meeting notes + +## Jan 10, 2022 [Public Meeting] ([recording](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D78xlu8z-2k&)) + +**Bosun**: Jordan + +**Note taker**: Dims + +**Steering Attendees**: + +* Bob Killen (@mrbobbytables) +* Christoph Blecker (@cblecker) +* Davanum Srinivas (@dims) +* Jordan Liggitt (@liggitt) +* Paris Pittman (@parispittman) +* Stephen Augustus (@justaugustus) +* Tim Pepper (@tpepper) + +**Community Attendees**: + +* Alison Dowdney (@alisondy) +* Kendall Nelson (@diablo_rojo) +* Aldo Culquicondor (@alculquicondor) +* Micah Hausler (@micahhausler) +* Ihor Dvoretskyi (@idvoretskyi) +* Eddie Zaneski (@eddiezane) +* Arnaud Meukam (@ameukam) + +**CNCF updates?** + +* 0:00:46 [dims] Maintainer Track session email for Kubecon EU is out. + * Possibly in the leads meeting tomorrow (stephen) + * Liaisons should reach out their sigs as well +* [add them here] + +**Votes** + +**Topics** + +* [0:02:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D78xlu8z-2k&t=2m): Steering/CoCC housekeeping + * AI: Liaison for CoCC Tim Pepper to ping to set a date for recurring quarterly sync. + * [tpepper] Close on [conflict-of-interest documentation](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/pull/224#issuecomment-990664183) location: see end of agenda today, broader topic needing discussion beyond CoCC +* [0:03:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D78xlu8z-2k&t=3m56s): Security Response Committee [micahhausler] + * FYI, we intend to expand the PSC by 2 or 3 beyond the [minimum 7](https://github.com/kubernetes/committee-security-response/blob/main/security-release-process.md#joining). Key motivations are to add additional folks in the oncall rotation, and to handle the amount of reports coming in. + * [micah] Increase size to be able add people over time (to rotate folks out) + * [stephen] is there a promotion process already in place? + * [micah] 3 month for an associate. They handle things that are already public. (see “[membership](https://github.com/kubernetes/committee-security-response/blob/main/security-release-process.md#security-response-committee-membership)”) + * [christoph] sustainability, is there a good pipeline for incoming associates. Fairly trusted role in the community. + * [micah] open up more slots for associates to build the pipeline and promoting those who are already associates to the full member. + * [micah] will drop a note to steering committee mailing list about PSC accountability etc. (no open meetings etc), we could expose more metrics etc without compromising issues. + * [jordan] yes please, similar to what we did with CoCC + * [paris] +1 we could do annual reports + * [dims] see [https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/apache-software-foundation-security-report2](https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/apache-software-foundation-security-report2) from today +* [0:10:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D78xlu8z-2k&t=10m28s): Annual report prep + 1. [liggitt] Updated [target draft/publication dates](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6322) + 2. [liggitt] Update [SIG/WG templates](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6301) (need lgtm from steering) + * [liggitt] steering folks, please review, targeting completion by Jan 12 + * [cblecker] Status of template generator + * [cblecker] Generator is from last year, have a local branch with some changes, need to write tests later. Will open a PR in next few days. Need to merge in the WG template. + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5514](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/5514) + * [liggitt] we can announce in leads to build awareness that this is coming. Liaisons too. + * Next step once templates are generated: + * Comms - announce to dev@kubernetes.io, etc + * Paris can help and engage upstream marketing team + * start in January after templates are generated + * Outreach/reminders to individual group leads - liaisons + * start in January after templates are generated + * Liaison doc: [https://hackmd.io/fu_S0ASnRAGqUDMyaH_-ag](https://hackmd.io/fu_S0ASnRAGqUDMyaH_-ag) + * **Steering AI: This is first draft; needs a good review ** + * [paris] we can do this offline, please read and leave comments on the doc. Pretty basic to kick us off. Left wild ideas for later! :) +* [0:15:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D78xlu8z-2k&t=15m): WG Batch charter discussion + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6299](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6299) + * [abdullah/aldo] for quite a while requirements for batch related things were coming to sig-scheduling, looked like we needed a WG as a lot of things cross multiple sigs. Improve batch experience in core kubernetes. Focus on Job API, job queueing, work better with schedule and kube controller manager. Reduces duplication, example everyone is rewriting Job API. provide hooks needed to build on things here that eco system can depend on. scheduling/apps/node etc will be involved. WG is more focused than sig-scheduling. + * [stephen] how close are we picking organizers + * [abdullah] pretty close.. Trying to engage apps and node for sure. Need folks from others and not just scheduling. IBM, RedHat, Google are represented in leadership. + * [stephen] co-chairs don’t need to be already leads. + * [dims] how is the community participation from other folks in CNCF being thought of. How can we bridge and not end up splitting efforts + * ahg: we want to build core primitives/features to support external batch integrations + * jordan: would be good to intentionally seek out feedback from external batch integrators (+1 bob) + * [tpepper] + * ensure leaders of this working group share that vision about bridging built-in/external groups and are committed to doing the work to make that happen + * vision/roadmap in PR is vague, which is normal to start, but would like to see that crisp up early + * ahg: could go in a few directions, depending on whether code/components are produced by this working group and don't slot neatly under a single sig + * jordan: would like to see investigating this as an explicit step in the working group (basically answering the "what is the roadmap?" question from the annual report) + * tpepper: would be useful to sketch out possible outcomes, even if they're not committed directions yet, milestone checkpoint for ~1year in to re-evaluate & update + * [christoph] current charter is “normal”, concerned about engaging folks outside of core k8s properly. sensitive to enabling ecosystem instead of "king-making" and building in "one true way". ensure working group is engaged with sponsoring sigs to make ownership of artifacts/definitions/code produced clear + * [tpepper] add to the doc to describe there are N ways of doing things which are quite similar in the abstract…the goal is not to king make but to distill out of these N similar ways, a common way. This is implied in the “want to unify the way”, but it’s not described so clearly as a “distill from multiple similar into a quality common alternative” words + * ahg: want to see unification of disparate approaches where it makes sense. batch ecosystem is very fragmented today, to the point where the ecosystem suffers + * christoph: fragmentation isn’t necessarily a bad thing on its own. Ecosystem enablement is important. Defining what problems fragmentation is causing should be important to getting buy in from stakeholders + * jordan: vision makes sense, but is good to be explicit in the charter + * [stephen] layout a rough draft and make the first action to be refining that. Not worried about king making. More concerned about this at the CNCF level. + * [dims] what do we need to do to re-engage the folks that went off and did different things? + * ahg: think the working group is the answer + * [tpepper] re: leads selection; will take real work to engage folks with external batch solutions + * [paris]: (said in chat) id like to see a kubecon update chartered in so make sure there is a solid bridge of communication with the wider community + * [dims] +100 + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6299/files/9ad2b608cfd47ac271d734a0afb44845996250b1#r781431751](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6299/files/9ad2b608cfd47ac271d734a0afb44845996250b1#r781431751) + * ordered AIs: + * wg proposers: incorporate feedback into PR, update proposed leads + * sponsoring sigs: ack final state of PR + * steering: assign liaison, vote +* [0:43:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D78xlu8z-2k&t=43m20s): K8s Infra [ameukam]: ProwJobs migration + * [https://github.com/kubernetes/k8s.io/issues/1469](https://github.com/kubernetes/k8s.io/issues/1469) + * [ameukam]: Progress is slow. Most SIGs don’t make it a priority. I would like to use the SC liaisons to request help from the different SIG chairs to migrate away the jobs their SIGs are responsible for to the community-owned infrastructure. + * [stephen]: can the work be sorted by responsible sig? + * [jordan]: individual issues per sig with more specific actions needed is usually more effective + * [christoph] for k8s-infra, need to be *very* specific what you are asking sigs to do. don't assume sigs will know what jobs they have or which ones are not running on community infra. sig chair may or may not know which jobs need work. [+1 from bob] + * [tpepper] coordinating point can be helpful + * [paris] if having trouble getting in contact with other sigs, that's helpful to know + * [stephen] k8s-infra is doing a fair amount of documentation, but getting the information in the right place and making it clearer who the owner of each piece is would be good + * [dims] question: what is the headroom in the budget for the new jobs this is asking to add to community infrastructure? + * ameukam: we don't really know until we complete the migration + * dims: we need to migrate gradually so we don't move everything and blow stuff up +* _— topics below here bumped for time_ +* Steering operational changes / discussion (prioritize for next public meeting) + * Roles + * ID more: [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/225](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/225) + * Liaison [https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/228](https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/228) + * Triage [stephen] + * A few things I’ve noticed while onboarding: + * We’re not effectively using the project board (while resolved now, many of the open items for Steering were not listed on the project board) + * Stale milestones + * Several Steering issues lacking assignees + * I’ve marked a few of these w/ /help, but if it’s on the board+triaged, we should assign a point person, even if it’s something that eventually needs to be taken to vote + * [Paris] Do we need an offsite or all day meeting to get through back topics? ([from Slack](https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CPNFRNLTS/p1638484593106500?thread_ts=1638466730.104300&cid=CPNFRNLTS)) + * [Stephen] Let's see if we can spin a lightweight triage process before EOY, and then async a bunch of stuff. If we find there are still things stuck in the hopper, then maybe a triage sesh in the new year? + * [Paris] Do we need a decision making process for Steering? + * How do we know when something is up for a vote? Or when something has had a decent SLA to activity? How do we know when to put something on the agenda? +* [Tim] [Election “Committee”](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/tree/master/events/elections): no time today, will shift to [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6243](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/6243) async discussion + * bumped to slack diff --git a/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/README.md b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/README.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..79530e29 --- /dev/null +++ b/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +# Archiving meeting notes + +At the beginning of each year, archive the old Google docs into this repo to improve the performance of the current doc. + +### Convert meeting notes into markdown: + +1. Make sure you have a document (new or exisiting) with exactly the content you wish to store. +2. Install [Docs2Markdown](https://github.com/evbacher/gd2md-html/wiki#using-docs-to-markdown) +3. Open up Google Doc > Add-ons > Docs2Markdown > Convert [Markdown] (taking the unselected defaults) +4. Select the output and paste into a document +5. Clean up any reported errors (usually from embedded images) +6. Add the new document to this repository |