►
From YouTube: CNCF SIG Contributor Strategy 2020-07-30
Description
CNCF SIG Contributor Strategy 2020-07-30
A
A
A
A
D
A
D
Cool
and
we're
already
recording,
because
cncf's
awesome
and
all
right
well,
it
looks
like
it's
just
four
of
us
hanging
out
today.
That's
cool,
I'm
paris,
you
all
already
know
me,
but
for
the
recording,
hello.
Everyone
today
is.
Let
me
check
what
date
it
is
july,
30th
all
day,
at
least
on
the
pacific
coast.
D
I
don't
think
we
have
too
much
on
the
agenda
today
outside
of
working
group
updates
and
potentially
dropping
formal
health
check
from
the
charter
as
a
discussion
topic.
If
anybody
else
has
other
discussion,
topics
feel
free
to
drop
them
in,
but
that's
pretty
much
it
and
josh.
You
have
anything
else
to
add
to
the
agenda.
F
D
F
F
F
Yeah
the
I
mean
the
toc
has
all
of
the
decision
making
power
for
anything
that
is
not
purely
documentation
right.
We
can
write
as
much
documentation.
We
want
about
how
to
create
good
governance,
but
if
it
comes
to
touching
the
actual
requirements
for
projects,
what
we
do
is
we
send
advice
to
the
toc
and
then
they
vote
on
it
or
they
don't.
A
Good,
I
worked
some
on
the
dock
and
then
we
talked
about
in
the
last
governance
meeting
and
I
think
that
josh
had
a
bit
that
he
was
going
to
add.
Jennifer
had
a
bit
that
she
was
going
to
add.
So
I
think,
as
soon
as
those
bits
are
added,
we
can
do
some
some
cleanup
and
then
pr
it
in
at
least
as
a
draft
to
get
some
additional
feedback.
A
B
A
Which
I
I
have
kind
of
a
start
at
so
if
we,
if
we
have
some
time,
maybe
we
could
go
over
yeah,
I'm
going
to
put
that
at
the
discussion
yep
we
can
put
it
at
the
end.
It's
not
it's
not
important.
I
want
to
kind
of
show
you
what
I
have
because
I'm
not.
I
don't
think
it's
quite
in
the
right
direction,
and
so
I
wanted
to
see
if
other
people
agree
with
me.
D
I
feel,
and
I
just
feel
like
a
lot
of
projects
from
what
I'm
hearing
anyway
are
taking
a
lot
of
this
stuff
extremely
literally,
and
they
don't
know
like
when
they're
reading,
oh
showing
you
know,
demonstrating
project
health
period,
it's
like
they
want
like
a
lot
of
folks
are
saying:
oh
well.
What
metric
should
I
pull
and
it's
kind
of
like?
Well,
it's
more
about
benchmarking.
D
A
A
F
G
D
D
It
looks
like
that's
it
for
governance
and
contributor
growth,
contributor
growth,
like
I
mentioned
it,
has
the
tracking
guide
and
they're
working
on
the
contributors,
template
contributor
ladder,
template
recruiting,
playbook,
potentially
issue
templates
and
all
kinds
of
fun
stuff.
So
I
make
it
looks
like
probably
next
quarter
we
can
see
a
decent
size
project,
template
repo
which
will
be
cool.
D
The
only
thing
going
on
with
maintainer
circle
is
that
we
still
have
intentions
of
launching
some
kind
of
birds
of
the
birds
of
a
feather
as
the
first
one
at
some
point
in
september
tbd,
if
you've
noticed
an
upt
and
uptick
in
people
joining
our
slack
channel
and
people
joining
the
maintainer
circle
channel.
It's
because
I've
been
doing
a
ton
of
outreach.
D
D
D
So
I
wanted
to
see
what
y'all
thought
about
that
and
if
it's
think,
if
it's
something
that's
worthwhile
I'll
put
together
a
little
bit
more
of
a
proposal
and
then
potentially
recruit
people
to
help
us
build
it
out
and
talk
to
cncf
and
your.
I
wanted
to
get
your
take
to
from
cncf's
side
on
kind
of
building
that
out
and
if
cncf
would
be
receptive
and
blah
blah
blah.
So
I'm
gonna
stop
talking.
B
A
B
D
D
D
B
G
D
F
C
A
B
F
Yeah
moritz,
I
want
I
want
to
have
some
of
our.
You
know
the
the
completed
and
approved
by
the
toc,
et
cetera,
documentation
going
on
a
web
page
rather
than
staying
in
github,
because
that's
an
easy
way
for
maintainers
to
differentiate
between
the
things
that
are
drafts
and
the
things
that
are
actually
official.
D
B
Yeah
so,
but
like
having
heaven
just
simplified
url
like
regular
url
is
readable,
is
is
the
best
way
to
share
it.
Not
just
link
like
this
extremely
long.
Url
audit
is
auto
generated
by
google
sheets.
So
that's
why
we've
created
this
short
url.
It
can
be
distributed
anywhere.
For
example,
we
have
like,
in
our
in
the
server
in
the
cncf
service
that
documentation
will
link
this
url
mentioned,
who
are
the
people
who
have
an
access
to
the
cncf
service
desk?
That's
one
simple.
B
I
don't
know
yeah,
I
don't
know
like
what
are
the.
What
are
your
current
process
with,
you
know
like
allowing
sync
signatures:
a
cncfc
chairs
to
file
tickets,
and
so
on
should
be
able
to
replace
it
here
as
a
person
who
has
access
to
it.
You
should
be
able
to,
but
it's
better
to
double
check
with
that
name
I'll.
Do
it
so
just
how
to
how
to
file
the
tickets
properly.
D
D
D
All
right
so
discussion
right
now
in
the
charter,
we
had
a
bullet
that
talked
about
performing
health
checks
for
projects
at
graduation
to
talk
about
their
community
and
things
along
those
lines
I
had
initially
when
we,
when
I
went
in
to
do
the
charter
updates
for
jared,
and
you
know
everything
else
and
trying
to
get
the
bootstrap
information
out
of
there.
I
did
remove
that.
D
I
honestly
I
I
don't
know
why
I
initially
did.
I
think
there
was
just
something
in
me
that
was
like.
We
don't
do
this
and
I
just
kind
of
scratched
it
off
and
then
that's
when
josh
was
like
wait
and
then
I'm
like
wait,
yeah
you're
right.
So
let
me
bring
up
the
charter
and
josh
what
were
your
initial
thoughts
and
then
I
guess
maybe
like
evolved
thoughts
after
that,
when
you
were
like
wait.
F
D
A
D
D
A
Okay,
so
so
I
started
this,
I
started
the
doc
and
someone
added
kind
of
who,
what
when
sections
and
then
I
started
diving
into
the
project
health
table
for
dev
stats,
and
so
I
basically
what
I
did
was
I
took
the
stuff
that
was
in
dev
stats
and
was
just
like
here's,
how
you
map
it
to
who?
What
and
when
contributors
companies
maintainers
commits
things
like
that,
so
this
is
like
this
is
very
tactical
and
very
tied
to
the
project
health
dashboard.
A
This
did
help
me
hang
on
one
second
josh.
This
did
help
me
sort
of
understand
kind
of
what
what
we
have
from
a
data
perspective,
but
I
think
that
this
is
completely
the
wrong
approach
and
I
suspect
that
it
should
probably
look
something
more
like
this.
So
here
are
the
things
you
need
to
think
about.
A
This
is
why
it's
important
here
are
some
examples
of
the
metrics
that
you
could
use
to
measure
this,
because
what
I
have
right
now
is
so
this
is
sort
of
kind
of
a
framing
it
in
why
it's
important
and
then
here
are
the
things.
This
is
the
opposite
way.
It
was
like
here's
a
big
list
of
the
things,
and
then
I
can
start
going
into
why
things
are
important,
which
I
started
to
do
kind
of
in
here,
so
like
how
you
would
interpret
it.
But
I
feel
like
this
is.
A
F
F
C
A
I
would
actually
use
these
as
examples
possibly
use
these
as
examples
and
the
other
approach.
So
the
idea
would
be
that
you
would
say
something
like
time
to.
First
response
is
important
because
of
these
things,
yes
and
then,
and
then
you
could
say
that
you
know
devstats
calls
this
this.
You
know
this
might
be
where
you
look
for
it.
Yes,
yeah.
D
D
A
So
yeah-
and
this
is
something
we
struggle
with
inside
of
vmware
as
well
like
I
have
a
very
simple
set
of
project
health
metrics
that
I
put
on
dashboards
that
we
use
for
for
everybody,
because
we
have.
You
know
we
have
hundreds
of
projects
that
have
a
significant
enough
number
of
commits
that
you
can
run
project
health
data
on
them.
But
not
everybody
is
going
to
dig
into
something
like
a
devstats
or
a
paternity
dashboard,
and
just
like
figure
it
out
for
themselves.
D
A
H
H
E
A
A
D
D
D
F
D
D
So,
like
we
aren't
it's
kind
of
like
governance,
we're
not
prescribing
a
model,
we're
just
saying
have
one
so,
whether
that's
a
sig
for
contributor
experience
or
community
experience
or
developer
relations,
or
you
know,
having
a
full-time
community
manager
having
a
part-time
community
manager
being
explicit,
like
with
what
cncf
does
with
your
community,
like
that
kind
of,
like,
I
guess,
is
kind
of
where,
where
I'm
going
with
this
we've
talked
about
this
in
a
number
of
different
avenues.
So
this
is
just
a
discussion
topic
that
I
wanted
to
to
pop
on
and
see.
A
Well,
I
think
there
are
two
sets
of
people.
There
are
people
who
completely
underestimate
the
amount
of
work
that
it
takes
to
do
community
management
for
a
project,
and
then
there
are
the
people
who
try
to
over
engineer
the
community
management
for
the
project
and
end
up
with
a
bunch
of
stuff
that
they
don't
need.
So
I
think
some
some
guidance
about
how
all
of
that
works
would
probably
be
helpful.
D
F
C
D
Yeah
yeah
yeah
yeah,
that
says
guidance
and
graduation
kind
of
I
think
like
it
could
potentially
go
hand
in
hand.
So
all
right.
Well
that
wasn't
much
of
a
discussion.
So,
let's
move
to
let's
move
to
badge.
Well,
I
guess
it
wasn't
much
of
a
like
a
heated
debate.
Rather,
let's
move
on
to
dims's
badging.
F
F
F
We
were
sort
of
throwing
out
other
ideas.
Dims
was
actually
going
to
go
back
and
take
a
look
at
the
annual
review
to
see
which
other
items
we
could
potentially
create
badges
out
of
the
the
main
reasons
for
doing
this
is
the
cncf
does
a
lot
of
sort
of
examination,
review
of
projects,
but
for
users
and
potential
contributors.
That
information
is
not
very
transparent,
it
is.
It
is
actually
hard
to
find
and
hard
to
understand
the
I,
whereas
a
bad
system
would
be
a
lot
clearer.
F
The
second
you
know,
and-
and
we
already
use
a
badge
system
for
security
with
the
cia
project,
so
this
would,
you
know,
be
you
know,
on
the
same
sort
of
principle
right
you
know,
and
other
ideas
for
badges
I
threw
out
was
things
like:
does
the
project
have
some
kind
of
contributor
onboarding
or
not
right?
You
know
these
sorts
of
things
the.
F
F
D
Couldn't
they
be
community
managed
and
community
enforced?
I
mean
the
community
itself
will
know
that
they're
bullshitting
excuse.
My
french
right,
like
I
mean,
there's
no
there's
not
too
many
people
in
the
kubernetes
community
who
are
shy
about
calling
when,
like
there's,
you
know
what
I
mean
like.
D
F
D
D
I
like
this
so
like
I
feel
like
especially
the
even
the
other
stuff
like
in
the
steering
like
imagine.
If,
instead
of
the
same
steering,
it
said
like
what
governance
they
were,
you
know
like
steer
like
you
know,
maybe
you
said
toc
yes
or
owners.
Yes,
code
owners,
yes
or
like
you
know
like
that
kind
of
yeah.
I
like
this
a
lot.
H
A
D
H
D
E
D
A
D
Just
this
one
like
because
we
know
that
this
is
solving
an
immediate
problem
right,
so
it
looks
like
the
to-do's
here
and
I'll
I'll
just
copy
them
leave
this
and
put
it
on
the
actual
agenda
too.
Just
so
we
can
highlight
that
it
looks
like
I
think
april
and
dims
were
also
working
on
this
working,
a
description
of
the
badges
escalation
process
and
badge
for
active
maintainers,
yeah.
F
The
yeah
and
that's
actually
a
good
exam.
I
mean
one
of
the
things
that
came
up
during
the
discussion
you
know
for
for
this.
That,
I
don't
think
is
in
dispute
is
well.
I
don't
see
as
being
able
to
automate
most
of
the
badges
yeah.
I
do
think
that
every
badge
should
have
a
very
quantitative
description,
because
we
will
get
arguments
about
these
and
and
anything
that
is
qualitative
will
be
a
source
of
argument.
D
I
mean
I'm
also
like
I
haven't.
I
haven't
dug
in
too
far
deep
into
like
technical
badge
systems
in
my
lifetime,
so
I'm
just
so
curious
to
know
like
not
even
outside,
like
even
outside
of
open
source
kind
of
like
what
are
some
of
the
other
ways
that
communities
do
badging
and
stuff.
Like
that,
I'm
curious
to
hear
from
some
experts.