►
From YouTube: SIG Contributor Experience 20180110
Description
Notes available here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qf-02B7EOrItQgwXFxgqZ5qjW0mtfu5qkYIF1Hl4ZLI/edit
A
A
So
we
do
a
full
agenda
today,
but
first
things
first
I
actually
wanted
to
do
something
a
little
bit
different
and
see
if
there
are
any
new
contributors
on
the
call
that
would
like
to
introduce
themselves.
If
not
then
I
think
it
might
be
our
regular
peeps.
It
looks
like
it's
our
regular
peeps,
so
hi,
regular
peeps
and
then
another
thing
I
wanted
to
do,
which
is
kind
of
diverting
off
the
agenda
for
one
second,
is
if
you're
currently
working
on
a
contributor
experience
initiative.
A
Let's
just
do
a
really
quick
stand
up,
because
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
kind
of
see
where
everybody
is
and
what
everybody
is
doing,
and
so
I
stand
up.
I
mean
like
less
than
30
seconds
about
what
you're
working
on
and
then
we'll
go
ahead
through
the
agenda
and
if
there's
any
space
at
the
end,
then
what
we
can
do
is
go
back
to
folks
from
the
stand
up
and
talk
to
them
and
do
a
little
bit
more
of
a
deep
dive.
B
C
At
VMware
and
VMware
obviously,
is
a
company.
That's
a
little
bit
newer
coming
to
the
kubernetes
in
container
space,
with
the
virtual
machine
legacy,
so
I'm,
acting
sort
of
as
a
liaison
between
the
communities
community
and
the
folks
who
are
starting
up
and
learning
about
kubernetes
and
the
company,
and
we
may
be
calling
it
a
contributor
experience.
A
B
D
B
E
I'm,
finally,
a
bunch
of
issues
as
suggestions
that
we
make
a
priority
for
110
and
I'm
working
on
standardizing
how
we
interact
with
all
of
our
treat
goes
through
font
format.
So
that's
both
attempting
to
document
all
the
teams
that
we
have
for
moving
right
access
from
those
repos
that
no
longer
we
into
two
pots
and
gradually
adding
more
repos
to
have
merge
automation.
Oh
I'll,
keep
adding
to
the
agenda
good.
A
A
F
A
G
Just
one
note
from
me,
as
I
mentioned
before,
in
the
warm
Birds,
it
was
November
yeah
I've
been
working
on
a
slide
deck,
forgetting
how
to
get
started
with
the
contributions
to
CN,
CF,
space
and
kinetics,
and
so
unfortunately,
because
of
the
total
Cube
conclude
native
con
message
wasn't
been
published
in
a
proper
way,
but
a
few
days
ago,
someone's
mentioned
it
in
contribute.
Experience
shed
so
feel
free
to
use
it.
If
you
need
it,
it's
also
duplicated
in
CNC
F,
slash
presentations,
github
/,
CN,
CF
presentations.
G
H
E
A
We
will
we'll
talk
about
mentoring
in
detail
in
a
second
here
blowme
agenda,
all
right,
thanks,
Chris,
all
right.
So
first
things
first
is
dev
stats,
I
feel
like
everybody
on
this
call
is
familiar
with
dev
stats.
I
mean
we're
at
least
visited
the
site.
If
not
it's
dev
stats,
gates,
io
I'll,
put
that
in
the
agenda
right
now.
A
The
thing
with
those
steps
I
think
that
we
keep
bringing
up
is
defining
what
tarps
mean
to
us
and
in
what
ways,
for
instance,
I'll
give
you
an
example,
Linux
Foundation
reached
out
and
said
that
they'd
like
to
start
showing
reporters
and
different
people
who
inquire
kubernetes,
especially
kubernetes
velocity
they'd,
like
to
start
pointing
them
to
certain
charts
and
certain
certain
stats
on
dev
stats.
So
they're,
you
know
they're
comment
us
is
what's
important
to
us
and
and
what
what
do
we
think
shows
the
velocity
of
this
project?
A
In
conversations
like
that,
I
gave
them
a
couple.
Suggestions
asked
a
couple
of
you
individually,
what
you
thought
as
well,
so
I
wanted
to
just
open
up
the
conversation
for
a
broader
discussion
of
what
matters
and
so
I
didn't
I
wanted
to
open
up
the
floor
to
any
discussions
about
what
you
think
matters
from
a
metric
standpoint
as
it
relates
measuring
the
health
of
this
community
yeah.
E
I
have
a
big
one,
we're
incorrectly
measuring
the
difference
between
approvers
and
reviewers.
Right
now,
so
I
view
the
health
I
view
the
health
of
the
project
as
growing
in
the
correct
direction.
If
the
number
of
people
who
can
say
yes,
a
PR,
is
good
to
go
and
have
the
final
say
is
growing
I
call
those
people
approvers
an
approver
is
defined
by
the
person
living
inside
of
a
notice
file
under
the
field
approvers
right
now,
def
stats
doesn't
have
any
knowledge
of
that.
E
Their
approvers
graph
generally
looks
for
people
who
use
the
slash
of
proof,
commands
and
anybody
viewed
pr's
over
a
while
and
who
has
the
appropriate
super
powers
may
be
aware
that
you
can
/l
GTM.
A
pull
request
of
the
bots
will
interpret
that
as
simultaneously
both
looks
good
to
me
and
an
approval,
and
those
that's
doesn't
know
enough
to
recognize
that
which
means
that
that
status
is
probably
under
counting.
The
number
of
recruiters
that
we
have
of
the
project
is
more
and
more
people
just
get
used
to
using
/lg
p.m.
E
I've
raised
this
on
an
issue
that
I
leaned
in
the
agenda
and
I'm,
suggesting
that
we
find
ways
to
have
dev
stats
to
measure
the
growth
of
people
in
orders
files
over
time
as
the
metric
for
healthy
project.
Until
that
time,
I
kind
of
have
a
problem
pointing
to
any
graph
that
talks
about
approvers
as
meaningful.
In
terms
of
this
project,
reviewers
is
still
meaningful
because
that's
like
anybody
who
drops
into
LG
TM,
I,
think
or
maybe
anybody
who
uses
the
github
feature
for
a
review
request.
E
H
E
Single
repository
in
the
following
four
organizations:
kubernetes
kubernetes
clients,
kubernetes,
helm,
kubernetes,
incubator,
really
perfect.
There
are
some
charts
used
repository
groups,
which
is
a
little
vague
and
unclear
to
me.
I'd
rather
see
every
single
repository
map
to
a
sink
that
does
it
but
we'll
get
to
this,
not
every
there's
kind
of
unclear
ownership
of
which
signals.
What
so,
the
definition
of
what
is
a
repository
group
is
a
sequel
file.
That's
linked
somewhere.
E
D
I
felt
the
original
bug
I
think,
like
I,
think
pointing
people
to
those
charts
is
good,
but
I
I'm
hesitant
because
I
filed
that
bug
and
I
initially
filed
it,
because
I
noticed
people
were
missing
and
that
was
the
I
only
looked
a
sick
cluster
lifecycle,
because
I
was
familiar
with
them
and
I
looked
and
I
don't
know.
I
would
just
like
to
if
they're
going
if
they're
gonna
like
bless
a
chart
as
this
one's
okay
I
would
like
at
least
for
some
of
us
to
be
able
to
go
dig
like
there's.
D
Some
organ
at,
like
my
company
was
totally
missing
in
one
Lucas
is
missing
in
another
and
I
I
feel
like
we
should
scrub
them
a
bit
more
yeah.
You
know
sort
of
like
how
Aaron
does
before
he
presents
it
towards
a
community
meeting.
Hey.
Does
this
look
sense?
Does
this
make
sense?
Is
this
tracking
well.
A
E
Not
just
kubernetes
and
kubernetes
is
the
only
project
that
has
that
weird,
like
approvers
versus
reviewers
distinction,
so
another
useful
agnostic
chart
that
sense
might
be
pull
requests
merged
over
time.
Again,
that's
something
that
can
be
easily
gained
but
sort
of
seeing
what
the
delta
looks
like
every
time
is
interesting
and
that
kind
of
I
mean
like
I,
think.
E
Those
sense
as
a
whole
has
been
a
good
place
for
experimentation,
but
I
would
not
point
to
it
as
an
authoritative
thing
that
has
been
thoroughly
vetted
by
members
of
the
community
for
authenticity
and
validity
of
data,
as
well
as
usefulness
for
day-to-day
use.
Right,
oh
my
god,
yeah
totally
on
us
to
do
right
now.
So
what
example
would
be
there
like,
four
or
five
different
dashboards
for
pull
requests
merged?
E
The
dashboard
I
use
most
often
is
PRS
bridge
because
that's
the
one
shows
poll
requests
merged,
broken
down
by
repository,
not
repository
group,
and
so
like
generally
in
my
day-to-day
job.
Whenever
I
have
a
question,
I
first
see
if
I
can
ask
that's
that's
that
question
so,
as
I've
been
trying
to
turn
on
merge
automation
for
various
repositories
across
the
kubernetes
organization,
they
use
that
chart
to
answer
the
question
which
repositories
are
merging
the
most
stuff
in
the
in
the
past
90
days
and
I
can
do
that
with.
That's.
That's
great
and.
A
I
think
I
did
give
them.
That
suggestion.
Does
anybody
else
have
any
comments
on
this
and
then
what
we'll
do
is
sidebar
it
for
next
time
and
also
we
can
continue
in
animate
on
the
mailing
list,
any
any
Deb's
dad's
thoughts
about
measuring
the
health
of
the
community
all
right.
So
there
is
a.
We
are
doing
a
dev
stats
bi-weekly
during
the
off
weeks,
Fridays
for
15
minutes
and
one
o'clock
Pacific.
A
A
What
are
we
calling
it
now,
a
pie
graph
of
the
week
or
something
thank
you
for
community
meeting
cool
all
right
and
yeah,
we'll
start
to
do
that
to
every
community
meeting
for
those
who
haven't
fit
on
we're
going
to
do
a
dub
stats
of
the
week
to
try
to
educate
the
larger
population
of
people
about
those
stats
and
and
see
if
they
can
use
it
in
in
their
lives
for
for
whatever
reason,
all
right.
So
next,
on
the
next
on
the
list,
we
have
any
testing
to
roll
out
developer
workflow
changes.
Steve.
E
E
There's
clear
communication
between
these
six
I
am
personally
doing
that
right
now,
by
attending
those
things
and
being
an
active
participant
here
and
the
lead
over
in
cig
testing,
you
may
see
Steve
show
up
in
the
future,
but
I
think
this
is
sort
of
a
placeholder
for
a
link.
If
you
have
any
pain
points
where
it
feels
like
we've
been
stepping
on
each
other's
toes,
you
know.
Let
us
know,
let's
talk
about
how
we
can
make
that
more
efficient,
but
if
there's
nothing
substances
to
discuss,
we
can
address
that
as
needed.
E
C
A
A
A
A
E
There's
this,
like
you
know
what
we
should
do.
We
should
make
another
website.
It
always
feels
like
I'm,
going
to
go,
make
my
little
secret
garden
over
here
and
I'm
gonna,
put
in
just
the
things
that
make
sense
to
me
and
appreciate
it.
It
grows
and
grows
because
it's
not
needed
effectively
and
like
we
already
have
a
garden
with
all
sorts
of
great
content.
That's
called
community
repo
yeah
I
recognize
that
it
doesn't
necessarily
like
live
alongside
the
user
facing
documentation,
so
it
doesn't
look
as
pretty,
but
I
still
feel
like.
E
D
That's
curating
so
right
now
it
only
shows
like
the
index
that
quantity
or
worked
on
like
four
caps
like
it
only
shows
like
the
one
kept
that
count.
The
Caleb
wrote
like
kept
one,
which
is
like
the
definition
of
caps.
So
I
think
you
could
work
on
the
presentation
bits.
While
the
content
grooming
is
happening
because
I
don't
see
I,
don't
think
necessarily
that's
the
same.
People
and
I
I,
don't
know
it.
F
Yeah
the
way
the
script
works
now,
there's
a
config
file
where
you
have
to
specify
like
right
now
is
just
individual
files.
So
right
now
we
just
have
like
four
files
defined,
so
we're
not
importing
it
wholesale,
and
so
someone
has
to
actually
decide
which
things
are
imported
later
on.
We
can
add
features
where
it
might
like
import
a
whole
directory
or
something
like
that.
But
for
this
phase
one
we're
just
kind
of
keeping
it
small
and
simple.
F
F
D
E
I'd
really
like
to
see
any
website
built
a
while
I
think
website.
Building
in
particular,
is
a
great
opportunity
to
tie
together
some
of
our
support
of
mentorship
communities
like
an
outreach
e
or
a
you
know:
women,
black
girls
who
code
or
something
like
that
or
focused
on
building
web
applications,
I'm
least
in
their
in
their
training.
Yeah.
G
D
A
A
Right
next
is
me:
chris
is
also
on
the
line
for
mentoring,
update,
again
I
think
we,
since
we
have
most
of
our
regulars
I'm,
not
gonna,
dig
too
deep
into
it.
But
if
you
have
questions
just
go
ahead
and
interrupt
me,
but
so
we
kicked
off
our
test
cohort
test,
cohort
being
12
current
members
who
are
looking
to
be
reviewers
in
owners
files
of
three
subsets
of
the
project.
A
We
have
cops,
QA,
DM
and
workloads,
API
representing
say,
gaps
kicked
off,
meaning
we
just
discussed
some
logistics
and
again
that
this
is
a
test,
and
you
know
all
flexibility
is
is
wonderful
right
now.
What
we're
doing
is
putting
together
the
curriculum
for
the
six
workshops
and
I
definitely
need
some
help
with
us.
Six
workshops
would
be
spread
across
three
months.
A
I
did
confirm
with
Tim
akin
yesterday
that
he's
going
to
do
one
of
the
workshops,
especially
it's
going
to
be
a
more
interactive
code,
review
type
of
an
hour
of
a
workshop
where
we
can
pretty
much
just
get
everything
that's
in
his
head
and
you
know
put
that
pretty
much
on
paper,
possibly
even
record
it.
So
my
ask
for
help
for
this.
A
Crew
is
think
about
that,
not
even
necessarily
for
a
reviewer
perspective,
but
think
about
all
of
rules
that
we
have
within
kubernetes,
so
member
review
or
approver,
and
they
all
need
curriculum
two,
because,
ideally,
what
we're
doing
with
the
test
is
we're
testing
a
couple
different
things:
one
we're
testing.
Can
we
do
a
four
to
one
ratio
with
mentor
to
mentee
in
a
group,
environment
and
group
being
because
a
lot
of
the
positives
of
group,
mentoring,
work
with
us
I
think
like,
for
instance,
releasing
of
time
burdens
and
just
peer-to-peer
camaraderie,
and
things
like
that.
A
So
that's
the
test
essentially
and
I
mean
because
we
know
that
obviously
people
can
can
get
to
these
level
self-paced
so
that
that's
kind
of
pretty
much.
What
we're
testing
here,
but
ideally
I'd
like
to
start
another
cohort
behind
this
cohort
in
the
very
beginning
of
February
and
ideally,
I
would
love
to
have
that
all
underrepresented
folks
going
from
new
contributor
to
member
so
that
we
can
get
some
some
more
perspectives
within
our
contributor
ladder.
A
But
then
also
I
want
to
keep
learning
these
cohorts
pretty
much
simultaneously,
because
we
can
that's
the
cool
part
about
this,
so
again
really
need
at
your
help
and
expertise
on
coming
up
with
workshop
ideas
and
with
skills
and
gaps
that
should
be
addressed
for
all
phases
of
these
of
this
ladder.
If
you
will
so
does
anybody
have
any
specific
questions
about
the
mentoring
program?
A
Actually,
one
thing
I
do
want
to
mention
is
I'm
taking
this
from
a
multiple
step
approach
and
what
that
means
is
everybody
is
a
different
learner
and
we
are
trying
to
what
sort
of
looking
for
we
are
trying
to
broaden.
You
know
what
our
offerings
are
so
we're
taking
it
from.
You
know
a
couple
different
strategies:
one
is
group
mentoring,
another
one
is
contributor
office
hours
and
I.
Think
I
only
say
that
now,
because
we
need
a
new
name
because
it
does.
It
is
very
conflicting
with
the
user
office
hours.
A
So
if
anybody
on
the
call
is
creative
and
has
an
idea
for
that,
please
let
me
know,
but
this
is
going
to
take
care
of
our
learners
who
just
want
to
talk
to
a
human,
but
there
can
tribute
errs
and
maybe
they've
read
the
docs
and
they're
confused
and
they're
not
getting
their
answer.
Quite
their
question
answered
honestly,
you
know
everybody
has
that
moment
where
they
just
want
to
talk
to
someone.
A
So
that's
the
three
that
we're
focusing
on
right
now
and
then
the
fourth
which
is
in
development,
is
more
of
them
based,
and
this
is
the
stuff
that
you
see
a
lot
with
new
contributor
workshops
and
things
that
are
event
on
site
like,
for
instance,
at
cube,
con
George
and
I
actually
and
Annie
or,
and
a
couple
folks
have
had
started
the
rumblings
for
for
that.
So,
if
you're
interested
in
helping
out
with
any
of
what
I've
said,
there's
ample
room
for
at
least
fifty
oh,
please
reach
out
to
me.
Ask
me
questions
right
now.
B
A
A
We're
starting
from
pretty
much
scratch
here,
I
mean,
ideally
what
we
would
do
is
we
would
look
to
go
as
a
model.
Go
actually
he's
done,
a
couple
workshops
now
under
their
belt
for
contributors,
and
they
have
an
outline
and
I
work
with
Steve
Francia
from
the
go
team
and
I'm
sure
I
can
get
the
get
more
information
from
him.
So
we
have
sort
of
you
know
a
skeleton,
but
we
definitely
need
some
help
with
with
building
this
out
for
sure.
So.
A
And
communication,
and
so
again
everybody
will
call
it.
You
know
you
don't
have
to
answer
now.
They
think
about.
You
know
tonight
think
about
some.
You
know
skills
that
certain
reviewers
and
his
need
that
they
should
have
more
in-depth
training
on
again
the
obvious
code
was
communication,
but
anything
else,
just
let
us
know
again
slowly
moves
out.
A
G
Because,
again,
it's
CMC
of
github
people.
We
have
recently
archived
2017
program
and
we
are
happy
to
start
working
on
2018.
But
without
your
support
without
the
community
support,
it
won't
happen.
So
if
there
is
any
person
who'd
like
to
help
us
with
driving
these
the
great
priests,
please
let
me
know
an
extrication.
We
have
cameras
ahead
of
here
mentioned,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
it
he
is
focused
on
given
that
is,
and
CN
CF
projects
from
Google
anymore,
not.
F
A
To
mention
like,
if
anybody
has
any
other
mentoring
ideas,
I
know,
I
take
up
a
lot
of
those
meetings
time,
but
if
anybody
has
any
actual
ideas
like
another
strategy
that
we
should
be
doing,
you
will
notice
that
I
have
not.
If
we
did
one
on
one
all
enforcement
ory
matching.
If
you
you
know,
feel
like
that's
a
good
approach,
then
let's
do
it
and
run
with
it.
A
Next
topic
here:
oh
it's
also
me
cool
I
wanted
to
see
if
this
thing
would
be
interested
in
doing
a
face
to
face
planning
session
and
q1
George
and
I
actually
just
had
a
kind
of
a
a
one-off
conversation
about
us
getting
together
recently.
So
I
thought
it
might
be
a
good
idea
to
if,
if
the
group
thought
it
might
be,
a
good
idea
to
do
like
a
one-day
you
know
face
to
face
summit.
A
I
did
one
recently
for
six
storage
helms
having
won
and
we're
also
trying
to
get
a
bunch
of
the
other
SIG's
to
do
face
to
face
meetings
so
that
we
don't
have
to
have.
You
know
huge
face
to
face
contributor
meetings,
to
sort
of
break
this
down
to
anybody
in
agreement
or
in
disagreement
about
potentially
starting
the
organization
for
a
face
to
face
on
it
to
enjoy
Michigan
and.
G
G
Time
and
place
proposal,
so
iBM
is
organized
the
index
conference
in
San
Francisco
on
February
20
s
and
they
have
six
free
rooms
for
anybody
from
CN,
CF
and
CN
CF
related
to
to
meet
there.
So
if
you
are
in
a
vague
area,
I
would
like
to
land
in
Bay
Arab
for
February
friendlies.
They
can
meet
in
Moscone
Center
during
the
IBM
conference.
It
will
be
totally
free
for
us.
Alright,.
A
K
K
A
A
D
A
E
E
E
I
had
some
weeks
without
sick
meetings,
so
I
started
doing
some
stuff
and
finally,
issues
and
some
of
these
I
may
need
to
hand
off
to
other
people,
and
this
seemed
like
the
right
thing
to
do
it
so
I
think
2018
should
be
the
year
of
finally
documenting
what
all
of
our
github
labels
are.
I
have
all
these
are
links
to
issues
where
I
started
suggested.
E
E
Part
of
what
I
would
be
curious
to
see
is
something
that
surveys
how
outside
collaborator
is
being
used
across
repositories
across
the
organization
I
recently,
as
a
member
of
the
steering
committee
now
have
admin
access
to
all
the
repos,
so
hopefully
I
can
do
this
soonish,
but
it
is.
It
has
been
interesting
to
see
how
many
repos
people
with
admin
access
that
aren't
part
of
the
kubernetes
org
I've,
just
been
merging,
pull
requests
all
day
long.
E
That
seems
weird
I
think
we
should
really
be
pushing
hard
to
make
sure
that
lots
are
the
primary
way
that
we
interact
with
all
of
our
repositories
and
so
doing
we
should
remove
direct
write
access
to
repositories,
except
for
those
people
who
really
really
really
need
it.
I
already
did
this
for
the
kubernetes
community,
repo.
D
E
I
suggested
doing
this
for
the
Kuban
at
ease,
kubernetes
repo.
There
was
much
wailing
and
gnashing
of
teeth
specifically
around
three
use
cases.
One
cherry
picking.
Labels
are
not
supported
by
the
bots
right.
No,
we
should
look
at
how
we
do
cherry
picking
and
make
sure
that
could
be
done
by
anybody,
not
just
people
with
write
access.
E
We
need
to
facilitate
those
these
cases
that
involve
people
directly,
editing,
pull
requests,
I
didn't
know
this
happened.
Apparently
a
lot
of
people
do
this.
Maybe
you
do
it
where,
like
somebody
opens
up
a
paw
request,
but
they
don't
say
which
issue
it
fixes,
and
so
you
do
have
write
access
to
the
repo
go
and
just
edit
their
description
for
them
and
and
say
which
issue
it
fixes,
or
maybe
you
adjust
the
title
of
their
whole
request
for
them,
so
it's
cleaner,
or
maybe
you
edit
the
description.
E
D
E
So
I've
got
a
issue
or
poll
PR
in
flight
to
make
sure
that
all
files
live
in
the
staging
directory.
They
don't
live
in
any
of
the
individual
repos
and
if
you
try
opening
up
a
full
request
in
those
repos
it'll
tell
you
we
don't
accept
these.
Please
look
over
here.
I
think
that
as
a
project,
maybe
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
have
a
policy
of
making
wiki's
go
away.
Wiki's
require
that
you
have
right.
E
Access
to
the
repository
and
I
was
just
advocating
that
we
take
away
the
need
for
right
access,
so
we
can
include
more
people.
I've
already
done
this
for
the
kubernetes
community
Rico
and
the
kubernetes
kubernetes
repo
work.
That
I
think
relates
to
this
group,
but
I'm
sort
of
doing
under
the
mandate
of
the
steering
committee
I'm
trying
to
actually
document
the
list
of
all
of
the
github
organizations
that
are
part
of
this
project.
E
Thank
you
to
Matt
Karina
for
starting
that
issue
and
I'm
trying
to
understand
who
I
need
to
get
sign-off
from
before
we
can
have
an
authoritative
list
so
that
I
can
enlist
Igor's
help
in
chasing
down
trademark
issues.
If
we
need
to
and
then
I
can
merge
the
next
full
request
which
documents
will
okay,
if
it
is
an
organization,
that's
part
of
the
kubernetes
project.
What
standards
does
it
need
to
follow?
What
should
you
know
who.
E
In
the
organization,
should
your
membership
be
public
of
their
deistic
insistence
that
teams
across
these
things,
what
sort
of
licenses
should
you
have
bla,
bla
bla
I
am
trying
to
make
sure
that
every
single
repository
in
every
single
organization,
that
is
part
of
the
communities
project
points
back
to
kubernetes
community
for
the
code
of
conduct
file,
so
that
we
have
one
file
that
we
can
change.
If
we
decide
we
need
to
change
our
code
of
conduct,
there
has
been
some
wailing
and
gnashing
of
teeth.
E
The
fact
that
it's
just
a
redirect
to
the
CNCs
code
of
conduct
and
some
Rico's
link
to
that
directly
already.
The
reason
for
this
level
of
indirection
is
so
that
we
could
say
replace
the
wording
to
talk
about
kubernetes,
specifically
instead
of
CN
CF,
or
perhaps
we
want
to
decide
that
we
as
a
project
want
to
use
a
slightly
different
code
of
conduct
and
the
CSUF.
E
This
allows
us
to
make
those
changes
in
one
place.
Instead
of
having
to
open
up
80-something
pull
requests
to
things,
I
don't
have
issues
of
open
for
just
yet.
These
are
kind
of
coming
from
brian
grant.
One
steering
committee
wants
to
make
sure
that
all
SIG's,
like
the
definition
of
which
sig
owns,
which
repository,
is
unambiguously
clear.
Our
suggestion
for
how
to
do
this
is
to
add
fields
to
the
60ml
file
and
start
by
having
that
sort
of
update
each
SIG's
readme
to
say,
like
you
know,
sig
no
doze,
the
public
repo
or
whatever.
E
There
might
be
some
repos.
That
are
a
little
weird
because,
like
multiple
SIG's
have
ownership
of
a
lot
of
code
in
those
like
kubernetes
kubernetes
will
just
have
to
sort
of
muddle
through
that.
There's
also
the
idea
that
we
talked
about
the
difference
between
reviewers
and
approvers
and
owners
in
our
membership
ladder,
but
we
don't
substantively
differentiate
technically
between
those
roles,
so
we're
going
to
have
an
owner
role
to
owners
files
so
that
there
is
a
person
for
whom
the
buck
stops.
E
Maybe
that
owner
role
is
the
sig
I'm,
still
kind
of
I
can't
personally
defend
this
one.
But
this
is
something
that's
going
to
be
put
forth
via
a
proposal
in
implemented.
I
could
really
use
folks
help
with
the
first
list,
and
I
would
definitely
want
to
make
sure
that
stuff.
In
the
second
list
is
not
super
controversial,
that's
all
I
got
George
your
hand
is
up.
E
Nettie's
as
a
project
currently
adopts
the
code,
the
CNC
f
code
of
conduct,
okay,
but
if
we
ever
decide
to
change
our
mind
to
something
that
is
perhaps
more
detailed
than
the
CNC
f
code
of
combat.
So
it's
like
we
adopt
that.
You
can
see
the
CNC
f
code
of
conduct
as
being
like
a
superset
sure
our
stuff.
We
want
to
make
sure
we
could
do
that
if
we
have
to
without
having
and
hit
any
repo.
So
like.
E
Made
sure
that
every
so
I'm
also
trying
to
make
sure
that
the
repo
called
kubernetes
template
project
in
kubernetes
org
is
like
wile.
Rico
should
kind
of
look
like
that
and
say:
okay,
all
at
a
minimum,
have
a
contributing
MD
file,
a
readme
MD
file,
a
code
of
conduct
that
MD
file,
the
code
of
conduct
I've
just
been
making
sure
that
every
repo
has
the
exact
same
mm-hm.
C
D
And
then
the
second
question:
what
about
the
outside
collaborator
role?
Matt,
if
you're
in
this
call
I
I?
Remember
we
had
an
email,
we're
bouncing
around
the
idea
of
how
you
would
have
a
hell.
Maintainer
person
would
fit
inside
a
kubernetes
organization
as
far
as
membership,
and
this
just
reminded
me
that
maybe
we
should
bring
that
up
in
a
subsequent
meeting
or
something
like
that.
Yeah.
L
What
we
ended
up
doing
is
we
asked
people
to
become
actual
members
and
provide
their
details,
and
so
we've
submitted
a
number
of
people
over
to
the
list
so
far
to
have
them
come
in
we're
doing
it
at
a
slower
trickle
rather
than
during
heard,
but
we
have
sponsored
a
number
of
people.
Who've
become
members,
Oh.
D
E
So
the
idea
is
instead
of
one
kubernetes
incubator
org.
There
will
now
be
29,
28
kubernetes
sake,
foo
Oryx.
If
you
have
strong
opinions
about
this,
I
encourage
you
to
provide
feedback
when
this
proposal
goes
out
to
the
broader
community.
I
am
currently
piloting
part
of
this.
On
behalf
of
cig
testing,
somebody
wants
to
make
a
repo
to
host
a
reusable
framework
for
integration
tests.
So
I
have
made
a
kubernetes
sake:
testing
org,
located
a
frameworks
repo
there
and.
E
It's
it's
not
yeah,
it
kind
of
does
mean
like
a
lot
like
the
discoverability
of
how
do
I
search
for
all
of
the
repos
that
are
part
of
the
keratitis
project
is
probably
going
to
be
a
lot
more
difficult
and
it
kind
of
sort
of
begs
the
question
of
how
are
we
going
to
automate
the
management
of
consistent
labels
and
sakes
and
membership
and
progress
across
all
of
these
sorts?
So
if
you
have
questions
or
feedback
about
that,
please
raise
that.
G
D
D
E
The
chat
here
got
some
examples:
how
other
open-source
projects
manage
their
github
repositories?
Just
need
you
to
reply
to
a
thread
that
you
Marin
and
to
mock
and
Iran
as
coming
from
Cloud
Foundry
I
would
have
must
preferred.
We
had
followed
a
structure
like
OpenStack,
where
everything
is
in
a
single
namespace.
It
was
fairly
painful
as
an
engineer
or
more
painful
as
a
team
lead
to
you
onboard
and
off-board
people
and
a.
E
Making
vehicles
works
seamlessly
there
and
what
it
ended
up
becoming
multiple
people's
like
part-time
jobs,
which
was
a
shame
just
by
access
to
the
best
automation,
money.
Goodbye,
yes,
I,
hear
you
loud
and
clear,
and
you
will
get
no
disagreement
from
me
on
that
front.
So
I
am
certainly
one
person
who
is
a
little
familiar
with
the
scope
of
the
automation
we
have
today
and
how
it
would
have
to
be
improved
to
support
this
brave
new
world.