►
Description
CNCF SIG Contributor Strategy Contributor Growth WG 2021-02-02
A
C
B
C
A
C
C
C
I
just
realized
this
was
recorded,
so
everyone
in
the
world
got
to
hear
about
my
migraine.
Today,
that's
cool!
I
really
gotta
pay
attention
to
that.
So
how
about
we
start
with
the
content
updates?
First,
actually,
and
because
I
think
we
may
talk
about
the
the
cubecon
talk
a
little
bit
more
than
anything
else.
D
D
D
C
C
C
D
D
C
B
Well,
I
mean,
I
think,
as
long
as
because
the
idea
is
like
you
know
like
we
would
pro
we
provide
like
the
description
part
at
the
beginning
right
and
then
like
the
bullet
points,
even
though
there
are
a
lot,
it's
also
just
like
choose
and
pick
what
works
for
you
right.
I
guess
I
like
I
get
that
having
a
narrative
feels
more
active
and
better,
but
also
like
is
that
the
like,
you
know,
considering
we're
making
a
template.
C
C
C
B
There
is
one
section
that
I
kind
of
want
to
revisit,
just
because
I
don't
remember
what
we
decided
on
last
time,
but
also
like
just
to
rehash
some
details.
So,
oh
cool
okay!
So
don't
look
at
the
like
table
of
contents
thing
in
the
above
section,
because
it's
totally
out
of
right
now,
oh
yeah,
that
works
okay,
cool
yeah,
so
one
of
the
there
are
a
few
things
that
josh
added
in
right.
Like
organization
member.
B
We
didn't
necessarily
have
that
before,
but
another
section
that
we
kind
of
veered
a
little
bit
away
from
what
we
were
doing
before
is
the
sub
project
lead,
and
that
was
partly
due
to
how
kubernetes
is
set
up.
So
I
kind
of
want
to
just
touch
on
this
again,
because
I
think
originally,
the
section
that
we
had
here
was
carolyn.
You
and
I
talked
about
this.
D
D
As
well
spokesman
yeah,
the
yeah
cause
like
a
sub-project
lead
would
be
like
if
I'm
in
cni,
you
know
they
have
like
leads
for
each
one
of
the
drivers,
which
is
a
particular
contributor
role,
as
opposed
to
I
mean
what
I
was
saying
before.
Is
I
really
feel
like
anything
that
involves
interacting
with
the
cncf?
Is
a
governance
role?
If
you
follow
me,
oh.
B
D
C
B
D
D
D
B
B
Sure
I'm
just
wondering
if
we
move
it
above
if
we
move
it
under.
I
guess
approver
right
assuming
that,
like
that's
the
direction
because
then
we'll
go
to
sub
project,
we'll
go
from
sub
project
lead
to
maintainer
and
then
under
maintainer.
We
have
like
the
subcategories
of
like
community
maintainer
project,
maintainer
release
manager
and
docksman.
D
B
D
D
I
that
would
also
work
the
so
I
mean
kubernetes
is
weird
because
it's
one
of
those
where
effectively
there
are
only
sub-project
leads.
There
are
no
general
maintainers
of
kubernetes.
If
you
follow
me
in
in
terms
of
a
formally
defined
contributor
ladder
role,
there
are
people
who
actually
do
have
owner
status
in
kk
root,
but
believe
it
or
not,
that's
not
formally
defined.
D
It
should
be.
The
somebody
needs
to
write
criteria
for
it,
be
there
at
the
beginning.
Honestly,
most
of
those
people
know
these
days.
Most
of
those
people
who
are
the
owners
are
like
release
engineering
people,
people
who
functionally
need
that
level
of
permissions
in
order
to
like
say,
produce
releases
rather
than
people
who
have
this
sort
of
path.
The.
C
D
D
D
C
So
I
understand
that
they're
in
different
documents,
and
they
kind
of
line
up
in
you
know
under
contributor
versus
governance.
But
if
I'm
thinking
as
myself
as
a
person-
and
I
want
to
gain
additional
responsibility
and
influence
over
a
project,
it
feels
very
natural
to
to
move
from
a
user
to
a
contributor
to
an
approver
to
a
maintainer
to
going
I'd
like
to
be
a
chair
or
something
along
that
line,
and
I
would
I
would
have
looked
for
that
in
the
ladder
with
the
idea
that
this
is.
D
Example,
chair
and
you
know,
must
be
elected.
According
to
the
procedure
link
yeah,
I
mean
what
I
would
want
to
avoid
doing
in
our
templates
is
actually
having
text
that
potentially
duplicates
between
different
templates
that
are
not
alternatives
to
each
other,
because
I
know
what's
going
to
happen,
is
projects
are
going
to
copy
both
templates
and
not
reconcile
them?
Yeah.
C
Okay,
I'd
be
happy
to
help.
I
would
have
time
tomorrow,
to
maybe
add
some
more
comments
and
maybe
put
in
something
after
some
project
leave
that
just
links
to
even
if
they're,
just
placeholders,
like
governance
roles
and
just
a
little
blurb
about
what
what
it
looks
like
to
move
into
some
type
of
governing
responsibility
in
the
project.
D
Yeah:
okay:
there
we
go
so
how
do
we
end
up
with
subproject
lead
twice,
so
just
fix
that
yeah?
That
would
be
good
and,
like
I
said,
the
confusing
thing
about
making
this
as
a
template
is
that
we
have
this
experience
right
where
everybody's
contributed
ladder
is
going
to
have
three
to
five
runs,
but
we,
but
what
those
three
to
five
rungs
are,
is
going
to
be
different
for
each
project
and
we
have
to
provide
examples
of
the
seven
or
eight
different
rungs
that
they
potentially
could
have.
C
C
C
C
The
other
is
in
the
existing
repo
cncf
contribute,
and
this
is
kind
of
you
can
see
what
the
pr
experience
looks
like.
So
the
main
website
is
in
our
repo
at
the
moment.
That's
how
it's
defined
and
then
additional
content
comes
from
the
cncf
contribute
repository
and
you'll
still
get
netlify
previews.
So
if
you
click
on
it,
you'll
still
see
like
what
your
change
will
look
like
in
the
full
site.
C
C
I
know
I
was.
I
was
spending
a
lot
of
time
trying
to
make
sure
that,
for
example,
you
could
edit
github
pages
directly
through
github.
You
know
like
markdown
and
not
have
to
have
hugo
installed,
and
you
know
all
sorts
of
stuff.
I
was
trying
to
make
it
so
that
this
would
not
degrade
the
experience
of
contributing
content
to
the
website.
I
want
to
make
sure
it
was
still
as
easy
as
just
contributing
to
a
markdown
page
in
github,
so
it
took
a
little
bit
to
get
it
where
I
wouldn't
be
apologizing.
C
A
D
I
I
mentioned
it
in
the
toc
call
this
morning,
so
the
one
thing
that's
going
to
become
a
source
of
one
thing
that
we
need
to
straighten
out
and
I
need
to
actually
email
the
toc
about
this
is
that
we
don't
currently
we're
down
to
one
toc
liaison
and
the
way
we
set
up
approval
for
things
going
into
the
contributor
site
was
that
we
have
to
have
both
of
our
liaisons.
Take
a
look
at
them,
so
we
need
to
actually
what
is
a
toc
liaison.
D
D
D
C
D
D
C
D
C
B
C
D
C
C
D
A
C
C
B
C
C
D
We
will
either
have
a
finished
draft
or
an
approved
version
of
the
contributor
ladder
by
kubecon,
okay,
but
then
you
know
for
a
session
focusing
on
contributor
recruitment.
The
only
real
advice
is
have
a
contributor
ladder.
Well,
you
don't
need
to
go
into
detail
about.
What's
in
it,
they
just
need
to
have
one
that
shows
potential
new
contributors
that
they
can.
C
C
C
C
D
C
C
B
That
was
kind
of
my
question
earlier,
like
who's
the
audience
for
this,
because,
like
I
feel
like
when
you're
like
talking
about
like
my
initial
take,
was
that
this
was
like
people
who
have
a
project
and
they're
trying
to
grow
like
the
number
of
contributors.
They
have
right,
but
then,
like
then,
like
the
thing
you
just
said
sounds
like
it
would
just
be
for
someone
who's
a
new
contributor,
not.
C
C
B
C
Be
just
maintainers.
I
was
just
saying
that
this
is
stuff
that
a
maintainer
will
need
to
think
about.
Okay,
okay,
it's
going.
It
has
come
up
with
every
single
project.
I've
been
on
whether
you
intended
to
mentor
people
new
to
open
source
or
not
they're,
going
to
come
to
your
project.
And
how
do
you
support
them
or
not?
C
C
C
C
D
D
Do
we
know
what
the
platform
is?
I've
been
given
a
name,
it's
not
anything
I'm
familiar
with,
on
top
of
which
I
kind
of
get
the
impression
that
there's
some
major
technical
issue
with
the
platform
that
they're
waiting
to
see
if
that
issue
gets
resolved
before
they
commit
to
it,
so
so
so
effectively
no
effectively.
We
don't
actually
know
what
it
is.
The.