-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[RFC] SIG-Node initial charter #2065
[RFC] SIG-Node initial charter #2065
Conversation
2f95009
to
220ad17
Compare
sig-node/governance.md
Outdated
- Number: 1-3 | ||
- Defined in [sigs.yaml] | ||
|
||
- **Technical Leads** |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TL have overlap with Chairs, is it expected?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes, it is expected. the traditional sig lead role has been split into chair and technical lead roles. for sig-node, i anticipate there will be overlap where chairs will also serve as technical leads, but we may want to expand the list of tech leads to at least have an odd number.
220ad17
to
371c365
Compare
Added section for scope per guidelines enumerated in #2078 /cc @dchen1107 PTAL |
@derekwaynecarr: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: PTAL. Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs. In response to this:
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. |
sig-node/README.md
Outdated
|
||
* Kubelet related features (e.g. Pod lifecycle) | ||
* Node level performance and scalability (with [sig-scalability](../sig-scalability)) | ||
* Node reliability | ||
* Node reliability (prooblem detection and remediation) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
prooblem?
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
|
||
#### Subproject creation | ||
|
||
- Subprojects *MAY* be created by [KEP] proposal and *MUST* be approved by at |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems like it should be generalized policy. I don't know if it belongs here.
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
* Node lifecycle management (with [sig-cluster-lifecycle](../sig-cluster-lifecycle)) | ||
* Container runtimes | ||
* Device management | ||
* Images, package management |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I know what you mean by package management but it might be confused with SIG release
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
|
||
The following topics are out of the scope of this SIG | ||
|
||
* network management |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can you expand on this? Or perhaps link to sig-network?
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
The following topics are out of the scope of this SIG | ||
|
||
* network management | ||
* persistent storage management |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
link to sig storage?
Thank you for your patience as we work to your SIG charter merged. Through the process of reviewing the first 11 charters the Steering Committee (SC) found a lot of copy/paste language caused by our poorly designed initial charter template. To fix this there is a new SIG charter template which focuses on the main things we want to see in charters: scope and responsibilities. Please consider updating to this charter template and putting focus into the scope and responsibilities. SC members will focus more on a deep review of scope more than anything else and using this template will help with that focus. |
371c365
to
b8941fb
Compare
b8941fb
to
574e0bb
Compare
@dchen1107 updated to opt-in to default sig-governance which did not differ significantly. @philips this should be ready for final review. |
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
- Container runtimes | ||
- Device management | ||
- Image management | ||
- Host resource management (with [sig-scheduling](../sig-scheduling)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I suggest calling this "node-level", for consistency with the other bullets
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
|
||
#### Code, Binaries and Services | ||
|
||
- Kubelet related features (e.g. Pod lifecycle) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The template says: list of what qualifies a piece of code, binary or service as falling into the scope of this SIG
So how about: Kubelet and its features
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What about:
- The Pod API and Pod behaviors (some fields are owned by other SIGs, but...)
- The Node API
- Node controller
?
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
Pick one: | ||
|
||
1. SIG Technical Leads (x) | ||
2. Federation of Subprojects |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please remove the second bullet if you're opting for the first
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
SIG Node is responsible for the components that support the controlled | ||
interactions between pods and host resources. We manage the lifecycle of pods | ||
that are scheduled to a node. We focus on enabling a broad set of workload | ||
types, including hardware and performance sensitive workloads. We maintain |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have trouble parsing "including hardware and performance sensitive workloads".
sig-node/charter.md
Outdated
|
||
### In scope | ||
|
||
Link to SIG section in [sigs.yaml] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think you're supposed to insert a link, though linking to the generated README seems easier.
574e0bb
to
1efc194
Compare
Thank you for the updates. /lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: bgrant0607 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 |
Co-authored by: @derekwaynecarr @dchen1107
/sig node
Topics for discussion with @kubernetes/steering-committee review: