►
Description
[SIG ContribEx] GitHub Administration Subproject Bi-Weekly Meeting for 20220707
A
C
Hey
folks,
Welcome
to
the
technically
the
June
GitHub
admin
meeting
that
got
pundit
to
July
because
of
conflicts
and
holidays.
These
meetings
are
recorded,
would
post
it
to
YouTube.
Sometime
later,
we
abide
by
the
CNC
of
code,
which
essentially
boils
down
to
please
be
excellent
to
each
other.
C
With
that
we
have
I
dropped
a
link
to
the
notes.
So
if
you
could
toss
your
name
on
there
in
the
attendees
and
if
anyone
would
like
to
volunteer
as
a
note
taker,
that
would
be
super
awesome.
D
Yeah
hi
everyone
so
actually
Priyanka
and
myself
wanted
to
ask
if
there
is
any
possibility
to
have
a
GitHub
action
to
update
to
automatically
update
the
project
beta,
because
we
are
trying
to
move
from
the
spreadsheet
for
in
in
the
release
team,
because
this
is
horrible
and
trying
to
you
know
like
have
have
you
know
like
using
the
project
beta,
which
is
you
know,
like
our
you
know
like
we
have
a
trial
for
manually,
updating
it
and
it
was
great
more
way
better
than
spreadsheets.
D
So
I
had
a
conversation
related
to
that
and
the
conversation
and
the
issue
was
like
okay:
how
about
instead
having
the
GitHub
action,
we
can
have
Pro
extension.
It's
like
and
I'm.
Okay
with
that
and
I
think
Priyanka
is
is,
is
working
actually
to
have
this,
but
we
would
love
if
we
can
for
now
have
this
GitHub
action,
because
it
will
be
a
great
help.
I
dropped.
D
The
draft
PR
I
had
a
few
months
ago,
actually
at
least
some
months
ago,
open
if
we
can,
if
we
can
have
this
happen,
for
for
the
book
triage
and
for
the
enhancement.
That
would
be
a
great
help
for
the
release
team
Bianca.
If,
if
you
have
anything
to
to
at
least.
E
Yeah
so
just
to
add
some
context,
there
is
what
we
want
to
do
is
maybe
have
the
boards
first
start
manually,
adding
data,
but
since
there
is
support
for
GitHub
action,
box
flows
already
from
GitHub
to
fill
input
data
into
the
GitHub
project
beta
board.
I
want
to
start
with
that,
and
I
have
read
the
suggestions
on
the
issue
where
they
are
like
pointing
towards
adding
plugin
to
input
data.
So
we'll
start
working
on
that.
E
But
since
it's
a
requirement
from
last
couple
of
release,
Cycles
wanted
to
have
the
board
at
least
some
somewhat
usable
by
the
teams
by
the
next
release
cycle.
So
that's
the
idea
like
we
want
to
start
with
the
using
GitHub
action
workflows
right
away,
if
that's
a
possibility.
C
So
I
would
need
to
like
look
at
the
pr.
I
am
doing
okay
this,
but
we
might
actually
not
need
to,
because
GitHub
is
adding
this
well.
C
Let's
celebrate
please,
please,
please:
okay,
I
I
will
give
a
thumbs
up
and
we
can
continue
to
discuss
this
later.
D
C
I
need
to
dig
through
my
email,
okay,
but
I,
hopefully
very
soon,.
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you
so
much
yeah.
So
if,
if
it's
not
like
that
soon,
we
can
have
like
thumbs
up
for
the
GitHub
action
for
now.
This
is
like
you
know,
like
second
plan
or
plan
right.
D
A
Okay,
so
if
I
prefer
can
basically
I
have
a
basically
a
pull
request
open
against
that,
for
is
that
Workforce
going
to
be
triggered,
because
it's
imagine
Master
of
the
Fog
on
the
master
version
of
the
fork.
D
I
think
there
is
a
settings
and
GitHub
action
that
prevent
that.
So
there
is
a
settings
that
can
prevent
running
the
GitHub
actions
in
Forts
only
in
in
the
main
branch
or
in
in
the
main
organization.
We
can.
We
can
check
this
for
sure.
We
can
have
this
as
prerequisite
for
you
know
like
running
I
think
we
have.
We
have
another
GitHub
action
running
in
kubernetes,
maybe,
but
we
can.
We
can
check
this
for
sure,
okay,
but
there
is
a
setting
somewhere
in
GitHub
yeah
to
turn
this
out.
F
So
just
sort
of
curiosity,
like
we
have
never
said,
enabled
actions
on
the
KK
repo.
So
doing
this
would
set
precedent
like
I'm,
not
I'm.
Sure
like
this
would
be
useful
if
you're
interested
in
the
GitHub
admin
hack
on.
So
if
we
allow
actions
right
now,
if
someone
else
comes
up
that
they
won't
allow
actions
like
they
want
to
have
some
sort
of
actions
based
automation.
Do
we
allow
it
that's
one
question
the
other
one
would
be.
E
I
can
answer
that
well,
I
was
to
start
it
sometime
after
enhancement,
freeze
and
which
never
happened
because
of
things
going
on
at
work,
and
so
and
now
the
code
freeze
is
coming
and
like
in
a
week
a
week
and
a
half
so
I'm,
not
looking
at
finishing
that
plug-in
work
anytime
during
this
cycle.
But
yes,
starting
definitely
during
the
cycle.
E
Maybe,
like
you
know
now,
we
go
to
I,
would
be
able
to
commit
to
a
time
after
that,
like
as
I
start
I,
I
can
I'll
raise
a
issue,
maybe
or
maybe
a
work
in
progress
PR
where
I
can
track
the
progress,
but
yeah
right
now,
I
can't
commit
like
when
I'll
be
fine.
I
would
be
able
to
finish
it,
but
I
will
be
starting
it
during
this
cycle.
That's
something
and
that
that's
something
like
I
would
need
to
finish
it
as
well,
so
I
can
commit
to
that
yeah.
F
Just
one
thing
is
like:
if
you
can
create
an
issue
for
it
and
have
like
put
a
help
wanted
label
on
it,
that
you
can
mentor
someone.
If
you
don't
have
the
bandwidth,
you
can
have
someone
else
work
on
it.
I
would
really
prefer
to
do
this
in
proud
because
doing
it
in
actions
just
opens
up
a
whole
other
kind
of
ones.
That
I'm
not
sure
everyone
open
right
now,
yeah.
E
Just
want
to
add
one
thing,
so
there
is
already
I
think
a
plugin
that
was
mentioned
on
the
issue.
It
was
something
a
transfer,
plugin
and
I
had
looked
in,
there's
already
another
plugin
to
brow,
which
feeds
data
into
a
GitHub
project
board,
but
the
older
one
so
I
I'm
going
to
look
at
both
both
of
those
plugins.
E
Since
both
one
of
them
was
mentioned
on
the
issue
and
one
is
related
to
get
a
project
board
right
away
and
then
I'd
be
able
to
maybe
say
something
concrete
like
what
how
much
work
we
need
to
do
to
actually
create
this
plugin
to
feed
data
into
the
GitHub
project
beta.
Is
it
going
to
be
like
some
duplication
of
a
already
existing
plug-in
and
not
much
work
or
something
like
that's
going
to
be
done
from
scratch?
So
yeah
I'll
start
a
issue
and
based
on
whatever
is
the
requirement?
B
I
have
a
question:
why
exactly
do
we
need
a
pro
plugin
because,
as
I
see
right
now,
it's
a
set
of
scripts
that
we
run
or
it's
a
script
that
we
run
and
we
can
run
it
as
a
plain,
simple,
proud
job?
Yes,
that's
what
like
what
pop
commented,
so
we
don't
really
need
to
write
an
extension
to
Crow,
which
is
a
plug-in
link.
We
just
need
a
proud
job
which
has
access
to
that
project
Port
via
token
and
I.
Think
you
can
run
the
same.
B
Graphql
queries
to
do
what
you
are
doing
in
the
GitHub
action.
B
E
I
agree
with
that
yeah
and
that
would
be
easy
yeah.
So.
D
Yeah,
actually
I
I
kept
asking
why
we
need
the
power
for
that,
because
you
know
like
we,
we
don't
need
to.
You
know
like
to
add
any
information
to
the
issue.
We
just
need
to
filter.
You
know
like
the
issue
with
the
tag
and
just
add
it
to
the
project.
So
if
we
can
have
a
job
for
that,
just
you
know
like
update,
update
the
release,
stack
and
that's
it
that
would
work.
This
is,
would
be
amazing,
of
course,
I'm.
D
B
For
sure,
like
there's,
there's
like
better
documentation
on
writing
a
proud
job
rather
than
a
proud
plugin,
so
you'll
find
like
better
revenues
to
finish
that
thing.
So
there
is
one
other
thing
that
I
wanted
to
ask.
I
see
like
first
step
in
the
action
pipeline
to
be
some
kind
of
token
delegation,
where
we
generate
a
token
from
GitHub
app
IDs,
so
not
something
that
is
answerable
in
the
call,
but
probably
something
that
we
should
note
for
future
is
what
are
the
security
implications
of
having
that
thing.
B
A
Get
up
secret.
We
have
right
now,
because
there
there
are
a
few
Secrets
coming
from
different
parts.
There
are
a
few
token
coming
from
some
get
about.
We
can
you
we
use
and
they
are
already
set
up
in
the
trusted.
Pro
cluster.
C
Sorry
dueling
mute
buttons
I,
like
we
have
some
other
jobs
that
are
similar
so
should
hopefully
just
be
able
to
you
know
copy
paste,
replace
with
the
the
GitHub
like
honestly,
almost
yeah
I
think
you
can
copy
most
of
what
you
have
in
the
like
run
commands
in
here.
C
E
Oh
I
just
want
to
call
it
out
right
now.
A
sense,
it's
more
of
a
enhancement,
sub
project,
a
thing
but
Bob
sends
your
hair.
I
need
some
help
on,
since
we
maintain
like
multiple
sheets
like
a
separate
sheet
for
every
release
cycle.
So
I
would
want
to
understand
how
we
are
going.
We
can
replicate
that
in
a
GitHub
project,
be
the
but
I
just
wanted
to
like
mention
that,
since
we
are
moving
that
discussion
to
our
sync
yeah.
C
On
the
plus
side,
if
it
is
at
least
if,
if
GitHub
can't
do
this
themselves
quite
yet,
it
should
be
fairly
copy
and
paste.
You
know
what
you
have
here
to
do
it
on
enhancements
as
well.
C
And
it'd
just
be
us
for
the
proud
to
be
changing
to
K
enhancements
versus
KK.
B
A
C
A
D
Yeah,
you
can
create
the
project,
but
no
one
can
you
know
like
update
this
project
or
contribute
to
this
project,
except
that
you
know,
like
the
less
the
permission
list
you
you're
you're,
adding
so
creating
a
project
itself.
It
shouldn't
be
a
big
issue
because-
and
you
know
like
anyone
can-
can
have
access
to
read
the
project,
but
you
cannot
update
the
project
until
you
have
this
permission.
Access.
C
Not
that
I
know
of
I,
don't
think
we've
done
any
other
project
board
Automation
in
the
space.
It's
also
been
kind
of
like
a
wait
and
see
because
the
old
project
boards
are
no
longer
like
the
project.
Boards
have
essentially
been
under
active
development
for
a
few
years
now,
I
can
explain
more
later,
but
there
there
hasn't
been
a
lot
of
interest
in
working
on
something
that
was
going
to
go
away.
C
What
was
going
away,
sorry,
the
old
project
boards
and
their
everything
so
yeah,
all
the
gunk
with
it
yeah
got
it.
D
So
we
can,
we
can
have
like.
We
can
summarize
that
that
we
will
do
a
pro
job
instead
of
plugin
right
and
we
will
see
if
we
have
something
to
update
or
we
can,
you
know,
like
add
new,
run
right.
Okay,
thank.
C
You
one
one
thing
outside
of
the
the
pro
job:
the
power
job
will
probably
be
the
the
quickest
way
to
get
done,
but
I
would
also
poke
Omer
and
just
see
like
if
this
thing
is
around
the
corner.
Like
you
know,
we
could
get
really
access
to
it
like
next
week,
then
that
might
solve
a
lot
of
other
issues.
D
I
can't
bang
him
I
I
already
have
like
I
chatted
with
him
before
during
the
same
issue.
So
we
will
just
continue
the
conversation
okay.
I
can
do
that
today.
D
F
Find
that,
like
the
new
membership,
coordinated
applications
close
tomorrow
and
then
the
next
three,
the
good
Amendment
team
will
be
reviewing
those
applications
and
we'll
send
out
the
results.
Next
Friday
through
the
15th.
F
C
You're
having
it
I,
don't
know
if
you're
having
an
issue.
G
Yeah,
actually
it's
my
first
time
attending
this
meeting.
So
please,
if
this
is
not
the
right
place
to
ask
this,
please
do.
Let
me
know
about
it
as
well,
and
the
actual
issue
over
here
is
that
during
my
LFX
project,
we
had
to
create
an
automated
sort
of
a
bot
or
an
action.
G
At
that
point,
it
was
feasible
for
us
to
create
a
mod
So
within
that
what
we
actually
also
had
a
GitHub
action
script,
which
for
which
you
needed,
write
permissions
for
the
pull
requests,
as
well
as
the
content,
but
for
some
reason,
despite
providing
all
the
permissions
as
necessary,
and
even
after
checking
the
permissions
in
the
GitHub
repository
settings,
the
GitHub
token
was
not
getting
right
permissions
at
all,
so
the
links
I've
provided
the
first
link
actually
shows
the
run
which
is
failing,
and
you
can
see
the
job
setup
over
there.
G
In
the
GitHub
token
permissions,
there
is
only
read
permissions
for
each
and
every
like
section
and
the
pull
request
that
is
related
to
that
job
is
mentioning
that
we
need
all
the
permissions,
all
the
right
permissions
for
each
and
every
of
those
actions.
But
despite
that,
we
could
not
get
through
that,
and
the
actual
task
that
we
had
to
do
here
was
to
create
a
reference,
so
even
that
the
actual
error
mentions
that
the
resource
is
not
accessible
through
integration.
So
I'm
not
sure
like
how
to
go
about
that.
G
If
any
of
you
could
help
me
with
this
most
probably
it
might
be
an
Enterprise
level
restriction
from
what
I
could
understand
after
Googling
a
bit,
but
I
really
have
no
clue
about
what's
getting
wrong
here.
So
please.
B
D
B
I
mean
in
the
past,
like
we
have
been
little
cautious
about
like
what
we
run
in
GitHub
actions,
because
no
control
of
security
there
or
the
workload
types
so.
G
So
what
we
had
initially
planned
was
there
are
two
jobs
in
this
action
itself.
Actually,
but
right
now
we
are
not
able
to
implement
that
within
Pro
because
of
some
changes
that
are
apparently
underway.
We
are
going
to
change
the
like
instance.
We
actually
are
trying
to
get
a
cncf
hosted
instance
for
this,
like
wherever
our
like
services,
and
we
also
need
new
credentials
for
that.
We
actually
publish
Amis
and
for
publishing
those
Amis.
G
We
would
need
credentials
hosted
on
those
instances
which
is
currently
not
the
case
and
that
I
think
would
require
some
more
steps
to
be
taken
care
of,
but
as
of
now,
we
are
trying
to
get
this
working
with
the
GitHub
actions
itself.
The
prow
stage
is
still
yet
to
come,
and
the
rest
of
the
team
is
actually
working
on
that.
As
of
now.
A
G
I
think
the
main
reason,
as
mentioned
by
the
team,
since
the
actual
maintainers,
did
not
prefer
using
Pro
for
this
thing,
at
least
as
of
now
and
as
according
to
the
design
logs,
because
they
were
trying
to
change
some
like
they
were
actually
first
focusing
on
getting
the
credentials
and
built
for
the
new
instances.
The
AWS
instances,
apparently
I'm,
not
entirely
sure
I
was
pretty
new
to
this
project
at
that
point,
but
yeah.
G
F
No,
it
is
I
was
just
saying
that
it
would
be
helpful
to
create
an
issue
in
the
kubernetes
odd
grapple,
with
more
details
on
why
proud
was
not
like
what
problems
brow
was
causing
or
what
problems
we
had
like
for
using
throughout
and
then
what
are
the
exact
permissions
you
need
of
in
the
action
scenario,
and
then
we
can
discuss
more
there.
F
G
I
see
yeah;
okay,
that's
fine,
so
even
in
the
next
meeting,
I
think
we
can
also
bring
up.
This
is
with
the
maintenance
over
here
right
so
on.
The
issues
like
I
can
also
pop
up
an
issue
on
the
repository
itself,
and
we
can
further
either
discuss
that
over
there.
G
But
if
the
rest
of
the
team
is
like
involved
in
other
stuff,
because
there
are
some
changes
going
on
some
major
updates
going
on
in
the
repository
itself,
if
they
are
not
able
to
handle
it
over
there,
then
we
can
I,
guess
also
bring
up
this
issue
in
the
next
meeting
right.
F
Yeah,
so
we
have
monthly
meetings,
we'll
have
to
wait
for
like
another
month,
so
I'd
prefer.
If
we
do
this
synchronously
and
that'd
be
more
faster.
B
F
A
Just
wanted
to
give
small,
more
concrete
action
about
this
I.
Think,
like
you,
want
to
report
to
Cluster
API
about
about
what
we
say
in
this
meaning
that
they
should
try
to
do
that
with
Pro
and
basically
tell
us
what
are
the
limitations
using
Pro,
because
in
Pro
we
have
get
up
credential
we
can
use,
or
we
can
add
more
GitHub
credential
for
GitHub,
inter
GitHub
API
interaction,
so
I
think
the
one
thing
you
will
have
to
do
is
basically
go
talk
to
the
crystal
life
cycle.
Seek
care
about
this.
A
Okay,
also
one
thing:
do
we
have
a
policy
right
and
that's
a
general
question
for
the
meeting.
Do
we
have
a
policy
writing
for
GitHub
action
because
I
don't
I
never
found
one
and
every
time
someone
come
up
with
an
issue
with
get
up
action?
We
we
don't
have
a
clear
response
about
this
or
not
the
right
and
one.