summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/committee-steering/meeting-notes-archive/2017-meeting-notes.md
blob: 6b0ee130271a1049ff9ba3115b6b842f998a6219 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
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