►
From YouTube: CNCF SIG Contributor Strategy 2021-01-14
Description
CNCF SIG Contributor Strategy 2021-01-14
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
The
project
will
belong
to
cncf
infra
after
that,
so
not
a
cnc
project,
because
it's
not
cloud
native,
but
but
one
supported
by
cncf
staff
and
available
to
cncf
and
linux
foundation,
projects
for
those
who
aren't
following
around
with
it.
It's
a
preference
election
application
that
works
entirely
off
of
defined
oauth.
B
B
B
B
Lifesaver
yeah,
it
doesn't
right
and
it
doesn't
even
necessarily
need
to
be
github
if
you're
willing
to
add
another
off
provider.
Sure
yeah,
the
only
one
we've
included
in
the
code
is
github,
but
it's
we're
using
the
generic
python
oauth
library,
so
anything
that
that
supports
could
potentially
be
a
provider
cool,
so
yeah,
and
mostly
this
came
out
of
my
pain
with
civs.
B
C
B
C
B
It's
configured
currently
to
use
mysql
could
be
anything
that
sql
alchemy
supports
the
and
you
know,
and
a
cloud-hosted
database
costs
money,
so
the
so
it'll
be
kind
of
we
can
send
a
recommendation.
Then
it'll
be
up
to
the
cncf
staff
to
decide
what
they
can
reasonably
support
there
and
part
of
it's
gonna
be
honestly
based
on
demand
right
if
I
were
amy
or
whoever.
What
I
would
probably
do
is
see
how
many
projects
requested.
A
B
F
B
A
C
This
is
kind
of
our
status
from
last
week
when
we
met
we
are
in
the
middle
of
interviewing
projects.
We've
done
four
so
far
that
I'm
aware
of
for
contributor
framework,
but
I
don't
really
know
much
more
beyond
that.
I
don't
know
charles
if
you
have
more
info
on
that.
Maybe
I
got
three
under
the
bus.
I'm
sorry,
if
you
don't
know.
G
C
G
G
C
G
B
C
C
So
I
just
added
a
link
to
the
contributor
ladder.
We
have
a
draft
in
our
repository
that
carrying
started
it
off.
I
think
I
think
it
needs
just
another
round
of
like
editing
and
a
little
bit
of
maybe
cleaning
up
the
text
a
bit,
but
please
take
a
look
too
and
submit
a
pr
if
you
have
more
changes.
You'd
like
we
also
discussed
starting
an
onboarding
guide
and
also
a
reviewing
guide,
we're
tracking
this
under
our
content
issue.
So
I
wasn't
going
to
make
extra
ones
for
that.
B
The
I
you
know,
I
don't
know
whatever
works
for
you,
the
actually
probably
one's
for
each
piece,
because
we
might
say
oh
wait.
This
one
is
not
quite
ready
and
it's
a
lot
more
helpful
to
actually
have
a
separate
issue
for
that,
because
otherwise
you're
combing,
through
all
of
the
comments
to
try
to
figure
out
which
things
were
actually
approving.
F
B
C
C
B
C
Cool
what
I
wanted
to
ask
about
is
the
current,
and
this
is
all
in
the
issue
I'm
just
gonna
read
through
it.
I
made
the
minimum
required
changes
to
make
pulling
in
the
content
from
the
contribute
repo,
the
existing
one
work,
but
to
be
honest
right
now,
it's
made
to
be
read
from
github
and
it
isn't
following
any
of
the
conventions
of
hugo,
which
is
how
we're
generating
a
site
I'd
like
to
change
that,
so
that
people
obviously
added
it
on
github.
C
D
D
C
C
A
C
Merged
them
together,
I
didn't
plan
to
I
wanted
to
get
the
poc
that
I
have
in
the
main
branch
so
that
it's
not
I'm
not
carrying
the
burden
of
merging
constantly
and
then
I'm
making
sure
that
anyone
can
make
edits.
So
this
isn't
like
a
oh,
you
need
to
finish
the
editing
experience,
so
I
think
I'm
almost
there
and
then
the
question
would
be.
What
do
we
need
to
do
to
switch
so
that
netlify
is
serving
that
url.
E
The
direct,
so
we
have
the
contribute.cncf.io,
which
is
directly
relevant
to
the
github,
I'm
not
sure
how
it
is
exactly
set
up.
This
has
been
done
by
lifitsu,
so
we'll
have
to
submit
the
lfit
ticket
to
change
that
or
you
can
you
can
redirect
directly
you
can.
You
can
submit
your
changes
directly
to
cncf
contributor
and
in
this
case
it
should
just
work.
C
E
C
E
B
B
C
So
what
I'm?
Taking
advantage
of
the
fact
that
hugo
can
pull
in
content
from
multiple
locations
yeah?
So
the
website
we
have
two
links,
they
say:
I'm
a
maintainer,
I'm
a
contributor!
Okay,
if
you
say
I'm
a
maintainer,
it's
taking
to
it
to
a
section
of
the
website,
that's
populated
by
our
content
in
our
sig
repo
and
that'll,
keep
going.
You
know
what
I
recommend
we
do
is
instead
of
having
draft
folders,
we
just
mark
it
as
draft
and
it
won't
display
on
the
website,
but
it'll
live
in
its
final
destination.
C
So
I
don't
have
like
anything
that
could
just
like
script,
switch
for
a
trick
to
show
you
so
like
when
you
write
a
a
web
page
for
the
website
at
the
very
top
there's
just
a
little
bit
of
yaml,
and
it
has
a
couple
fields
like
what's
a
title
things
like
that.
What's
the
description
and
one
of
them
that
we
can
use
is
draft
and
what
that
means
is
when
we
publish
the
website
to
production,
that
page
won't
be
included,
gotcha
it'll
still
be
in
github,
which
is
great.
C
B
C
Sorry,
the
other
repository,
and
you
know
over
time
we
may
want
to
right
now
it's
just
two
giant
pages.
To
be
honest,
we
may
want
to
split
that
up,
because
now
that
we
have
you
know
website
format
we're
not
just
using
github.
I
think
we
may
be
able
to
present
it
better.
So
it's
not
quite
so
overwhelming
and
scrolling
yeah.
B
A
B
In
the
meantime,
the
rest
of
us
should
look
at
what
other
sort
of
content
we
can
get
online,
since
we
can
just
push
it
into
our
existing
folders
yeah,
the
and
and
we'll
file
some
issues,
because
I
just
realized.
I
actually
want
to
make
a
a
subheading
under
governance,
so
the
okay
cool,
great
work,
I'm
getting
very
used
to
looking
at
doxy
sites.
Lately
the,
although
I'll
admit
on
my
other
sites,
I'm
using
doxy
jekyll,
so
that
I
don't
actually
have
to
have
a
build
step.
B
It's
a
set
of
jekyll
themes
that
give
you
the
same
layout
and
functionality
as
doxy.
I
didn't
even
know
that
existed,
that's
awesome
and,
and
the
reason
to
use
it
is
that
if
you're
using
hugo
doxy
right,
then
your
ci
or
on
your
desktop,
you
need
to
go
through
a
build
step
before
publishing
and
because
jekyll
is
run
by
github
itself.
You
don't
you
can
skip
the
build
step.
Yeah
well,.
C
B
But
they
look
the
same
so
okay,
awesome!
So
that's
where
we
are
on
the
website.
Everybody
should
be
contributing
to
that.
The
and
this
now
means
that
if
you
create
a
document
in
your
folder,
it
needs
to
have
a
little
bit
of
metadata
at
the
top
of
it,
and
it
really
is
a
very
little
bit
look
at
the
existing
pages.
B
B
C
I
was
wondering
if
we'd
like
to
focus
on
some
of
the
guides
that
we
finished
creating
yeah
like
have
a
topic,
that's
about.
Actually,
I
think
dawn
submitted
one.
I
think
I
saw
your
proposal
but
stuff
like
that,
like
some
of
our
advisory
guides
would
just
make
great
talks
stand
alone.
Yeah.
How
do
you
do
a
contributing
guide?
How
do
you
welcome
new
contributors?
Things
like
that.
B
B
Okay,
well
I
mean
that
would
actually
kind
of
have
an
argument.
It
wouldn't
be
a
bad
thing
to
have
a
session
that
sort
of
focuses
on
contributor
growth,
because
that's
an
area
where
we've
had
a
lot
of
questions
from
projects,
and
it
would
be
a
little
different
from
the
attempted
session
that
we
had
in
the
fall.
The
and,
I
think,
would
have
a
lot
of
interest
again
from
from
the
sort
of
target
attendees
for
kubecon
spring.
C
B
Yeah,
the
that's
just
a
thought
right.
If
you
have
something
something
else
that
you
think
would
be
bigger,
but
but
that
is
kind
of
the
question
we've
been
getting
from
projects,
you
know
how
do
how
do
I
get
contributors?
I
have
this
project,
it's.
You
know
technically
successful,
but
it's
like
our
company
and
our
company's
ecosystem.
So
how
do
I
start
getting
public
contributors
is
a
big
one.
C
B
C
C
Yeah,
so
I
think
that,
like
that
would
be
an
area
that
no
one's,
no
one's
really
submitted
anything
on
to
say:
how
do
I
bring
people
in
what
are
good
practices?
What
would
a
contributor
ladder?
Look
like
a
contributing
guide,
any
of
those
types
of
things
you
know
people
were
focusing
on
different
areas
of
contributor
growth
in
their
talks.
B
D
F
D
B
B
D
G
B
B
B
So
you
know
and
and
pretty
much
everything
going
into
the
qlc
repo
does
get
at
least
brought
up
at
a
toc
meeting,
and
I'm
just
saying
you
know
hey.
If
I
publish
a
guide
on
you
know,
if
we
publish,
for
example,
a
new
contributor
ladder
template
that
should
not
need
to
be
approved
by
the
entire
toc
right.
F
B
You
know
it's
just
not
some
things
right
like
if
we
post
guidance
on
the
multi-organization
requirement,
etc.
That
probably
does
need
to
be
approved
by
the
full
toc
simply
because
they've
already
argued
about
it,
but
for
most
of
our
documents,
they're,
just
it's
just
missing
documentation.
It's
not.