SIG Governance Long Template #1650
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
pwittrock
force-pushed
the
sig-governance
branch
10 times, most recently
from
3bc516e to
057c523
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pwittrock This doc looks amazinggg. It's so incredibly well thought out and I think it's a great starting point for SIGs to be able to define their Governance structure. Thank you so much. I left several comments and questions below. Looking forward to your thoughts.
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
| PR description so we can improve the process and iterate on this | ||
| document. | ||
|
|
||
| ## FAQ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a thought: It'd be nice to have the FAQ section look like this:
FAQ
- [Why is it so long?]<link>
- [Why so much structure]<link>
- [Why use mailing lists for tracking roles]<link>
Just to help us get to the meat quicker. A person may be inclined to read the whole FAQ first and I don't know if that should be the goal.
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
| removing or changing roles, responsibilities, and processes. When | ||
| diverging from this template, please help us understand why in the | ||
| PR description so we can improve the process and iterate on this | ||
| document. |
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
| their corresponding responsibilities, how each is chosen, and how | ||
| they can be contacted. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Administrative role |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel this title should remain SIG lead. I don't see the need to change it to admin. Changing it will cause unnecessary overhead for creating new google groups. Even though this role doesn't encompass technical decision making, this person/set of people will still need to have domain experience to be able to carry out these tasks. The admin title doesn't seem to over all of the responsibilities described below. Additionally: I, as a woman, am sensitive to taking on a role with the title admin in it. That has historically been a dangerous association for me career-wise. I can't speak for anyone else; just my personal experience as an example here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank for you this insight. I think it bothered me as well, but you articulated it well. I changed the role name to SIG lead, and described the responsibilities as operational in nature, comparing the role to VP of operations at an organization. Please let me know if you agree with this change.
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### Why track membership as a special role? | ||
|
|
||
| Decision making in SIGs is lazy consensus driven, however it is |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we add a link to a description of lazy consensus here?
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
| SIG ~~Foo~~ maintains 2-3 administrators. When an administrator steps | ||
| down from their position, they may propose a new | ||
| administrator from the SIG ~~Foo~~ members to take their place. Lazy | ||
| consensus should follow. If lazy consensus cannot be achieved |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we add a link to a description of lazy consensus here?
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### Member role | ||
|
|
||
| Canonical list of members: kubernetes-sig-cli-members@googlegroups.com |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
kubernetes-sig-~~foo~~-members@googlegroups.com to stay consistent with the example?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've shown my cards...
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
| it is the responsibility of the SIG governance to ensure that | ||
| where and how are well defined. | ||
|
|
||
| In SIG ~~Foo~~ Proposals are made using a commonly used tool |
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
| an oncall rotation must be setup containing SIG ~~Foo~~ members. The | ||
| purpose of this group is to proactively monitor signals for the health | ||
| of the areas owned by the SIG, and to provide an escalation point for | ||
| urgent or critical issues. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the event that a member does not volunteer, does this responsibility default to the tech lead?
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
| of the areas owned by the SIG, and to provide an escalation point for | ||
| urgent or critical issues. | ||
|
|
||
| #### Test SLO |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe this is the first time in this doc we're referring to the acronym SLO. Could we provide a link to the definition here?
committee-steering/sig-governance.md
Outdated
| contributions for new development, and only accept bug fixes | ||
| and sustaining engineering until the issue has been resolved. | ||
| If no resolution can be found, the issue may be escalated to the | ||
| Steering Committee. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
let's add the steering committee email here?
pwittrock
force-pushed
the
sig-governance
branch
from
057c523 to
0323b22
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
added
size/XL
pwittrock
force-pushed
the
sig-governance
branch
from
0323b22 to
c7a76a7
Compare
|
Thanks @michelleN PTAL |
pwittrock
force-pushed
the
sig-governance
branch
7 times, most recently
from
90656a3 to
0540240
Compare
|
What would you think of doing this in 2 rounds - first the readme + requirements + short template, then the long template. I think it may be easier to get consensus on the requirements + short template first. |
|
|
||
| This section describes the various roles governing the SIG. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Sig leads |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sheppard, Function Lead, Manager ... But not Lead IMO.
/cc @jbeda
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shepherd
Steward
Facilitator
Admin
Coordinator
Chair
Whip
There was a problem hiding this comment.
of those listed, if Lead is not desired, I guess Admin or Administrator is preferred.
committee-steering/governance/faq.md
Outdated
| more structure over less. (almost all answers were to have | ||
| the same or more amount of structure) | ||
|
|
||
| ## Why use mailing lists for tracking roles |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Per other discussions... this is not tenable, and OWNERS has to be a system of record.
committee-steering/governance/faq.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### Question: What to focus on | ||
|
|
||
| - 35% - Discussion and resolution of decisions |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't we should reference %'s as surveys change over time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mean peoples opinions or the survey results? The survey is closed and not accepting additional responses. I will double check the %'s.
|
|
||
| #### Oncall | ||
|
|
||
| In order to facilitate consistently passing tests and triage of issues, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Again, I think this is impossible with a volunteer army. I would much prefer to block a release until a bar is met.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Again, I think this is impossible with a volunteer army. I would much prefer to block a release until a bar is met.
How do you see this working and who do you think should be accountable for tests passing? How do you see a volunteer army reliably keeping a codebase healthy without heroics on the part of a few individuals? I believe Google its own test oncall rotation for multi-cluster. Are you opposed to opening up rotations such as this one to the community?
We have tried blocking the release in the past and IIRC we gave up since putting that put the full burden of test health across the project on SIG release and SIG testing - which was not sustainable. Today we don't look at each SIG's tests as part of the release. An example of this in practice was that for 1.9 SIG cli's tests were broken at the time of the release and we released anyway without anyone noticing until weeks afterward.
FWIW, the short template has a lower overhead process for keeping tests healthy.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you opposed to opening up rotations such as this one to the community?
Not opposed, but folks need to volunteer for it, vs. taking it onto a leadership role as part of a release. E.g. have a test-release czar/captain for a sig. It is a non-glorious job that can take a lot of work.
pwittrock
force-pushed
the
sig-governance
branch
from
ce38873 to
7962df2
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
added
size/L
pwittrock
force-pushed
the
sig-governance
branch
from
7962df2 to
69cbb84
Compare
|
|
||
| **Note:** Sig leads *MAY* ask for help to assist with specific responsibilities. | ||
|
|
||
| #### Responsibilities towards members the SIG |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Responsibilities towards the SIG members
| - *MAY* also be a SIG lead | ||
| - *MAY* retain the title "~~Foo~~ technical lead emeritus" when stepping down. | ||
|
|
||
| #### Responsibilities towards members the SIG |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+#### Responsibilities towards the SIG members
| - *MAY* also be a SIG lead | ||
| - *MAY* retain the title "~~Foo~~ project lead emeritus" when stepping down. | ||
|
|
||
| #### Responsibilities towards members the SIG |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+#### Responsibilities towards the SIG members
| Canonical list of sig leads: <dir>/OWNERS (Members section). This list is mirrored to: | ||
| kubernetes-sig-~~foo~~-members@googlegroups.com | ||
|
|
||
| ### Responsibilities towards members the SIG |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+### Responsibilities towards the SIG members
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
pwittrock
force-pushed
the
sig-governance
branch
from
69cbb84 to
c57809c
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
needs-rebase
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Assign the PR to them by writing The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
@pwittrock: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
|
@pwittrock: PR needs rebase. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lifecycle/stale
|
I think this was abandoned in favor of the templates that are now merged. /close |
Long template for sig governance
Also see:
Requirements PR: SIG Governance Requirements and Recommendations #1800Merged