Kubernetes Steering Committee, 16 Jan 2019

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Steering Committee 20190116

Description

Chat transcript (times may not line up):

00:05:04 Aaron of SIG Beard: https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/projects/1
00:15:38 Aaron of SIG Beard: Caveman say Ug
00:17:06 Aaron of SIG Beard: SUG vs SIG
00:17:33 Aaron of SIG Beard: 1.14 duties are soaking up my bandwidth this Q FWIW
00:18:29 Aaron of SIG Beard: https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/governance.md
00:19:54 Michelle Noorali: What doc are we talking about ?
00:20:03 Michelle Noorali: thn
00:23:25 Brandon PHilips: I audited it today: https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/28#issuecomment-454879591
00:38:56 Derek Carr: +1 to see how it goes and try it out
00:44:05 Michelle Noorali: You got me!
00:44:06 Michelle Noorali: yep
00:44:35 Michelle Noorali: I do my steering stuff on Wednesdays we have off
00:44:44 Michelle Noorali: But +1 for making every other week open
00:48:13 Michelle Noorali: +1 to Committee
00:48:36 Michelle Noorali: https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/governance.md#committees

A

I did not realize that Brandon's sock cap was a sock calf and I was like. Is it a do-rag.

A

Dericks with me see you got.

B

B

So Tim and I are in Palo Alto to do VMware orientation. We are getting oriented that assess.

C

B

A

You guys gonna get your vCloud air certifications. You know.

B

Beat cloud air is no longer a thing right: oh really, yeah! This is company figuring, something out there I'll be sure to use that in zero ways.

B

Vita declutter I think was a effort to create a public cloud and that's a that's a hard game.

D

E

Quick I say is that cloud stack I.

F

Think there were like 12 of them, I think.

E

They renamed it pro.

G

I'm not gonna, make comments about what is it now or something.

B

So the reminders for Outlook they're just awful just pop up and they keep popping up and they don't go away. If you have no tool.

F

Windows open against anything else, then all the sudden you'll have.

E

F

A denial of service attack.

E

So we, when Rackspace was using Outlook, we would use Firefox like a different browser for Outlook Web and then mute notifications from that app completely.

G

Just like I'm dedicated to that one.

F

I think we can't.

B

Really get started, we don't have any agenda topics.

D

We have the dashboard, so I took a look through that last couple of days. Here doubts a couple of obvious things, but there are actually a bunch of things open. So there are.

B

Yes, what you mean the the project, the project page for Oh, first ankeny? Okay, do we want to run off of that yeah.

D

So there are a few charters still in flight I. Guess your experience when merged this week, Phil is looking at the sig Docs charter again, which was created around I. Think just before coupon yeah.

D

Resuming there I think the big open issues, charter wise, are big big data and whether we should make that into a working group. Instead that was deferred until Q Khan, and now it's supposed Keep Calm there.

D

You know chatting with the folks I know from sick data. They're, not you know, I, don't think they really care one way or another. They probably just want us.

F

Won it I would the only thing the only parents say question was whether or not they should liberate the gaps. I think that makes sense to me, but I, don't know of other people on thoughts, yeah.

D

That's the way it was originally more or less.

E

D

E

My interpretation from reading through the thread is the one person essentially wants something long running and working groups not really to fit either like. What's what's the yeah.

D

Yeah so the other thought I had is we have this discussion about birds of a feather groups, boss or other kinds of unofficial groups, minute or user groups, and this really seems to fit that really I mean it's stuff that is never gonna be in kubernetes and it's really a use case. So we've been really inconsistent about forming working groups, there have been working working groups and some things that are kind of in that category and in other cases the working group proposals have been rejected.

D

Think big data predates the formalization of working groups and it was a really long time ago and then it was dormant for a while, and it was resurrected as a stake so and we could just leave it because it's not creating the main trouble it creates. Is it dilutes the understanding of what a SIG's are and what working groups are?

D

And then we end up having these long discussions on a case by case basis? Oh but yeah, it doesn't really fit with the normal state governance because they don't have code, they I, don't know if they do community updates on a regular basis. I, really, they just need a discussion forum, yeah.

E

Another way to push it off would just be having forum like seeing staff working group, big data or something well.

D

Yeah, so that's an active topic of discussion scenes yep, creating SIG's and working groups there, so that might actually make sense. I, don't know how so so.

B

I mean another option here would be something along the lines of we we say: hey, you guys are a you know, support group or a user group. We put, you know those things in SIG's DMO and you know we're equivalent and point to you know mailing lists and I'm gonna, discuss and say, hey, look and then, and then it's like to form one of those. It's just got to be something. That's you know centered around kubernetes, so can't be any random ol thing, but like the bar there yeah.

D

I mean I'm in favor of that there have been demand for that in other areas like developer tools and see ICD and other types of applications, that even machine learning there's a working group for machine learning right. But it's very similar to this. The only difference is there is some my GPU component or something like that they might actually want to get into kubernetes edge is sort of borderline as well edges on the edge, but and this one there are no plans in the foreseeable future to actually make any proposals to the core.

D

I mean theoretically, it's possible. They could propose changes to job or something like that. But so far that focus has been integrating community support into existing frameworks like spark and airflow. They don't need a thing to those changes to a job yeah and they don't exactly. They don't need a stick for that, so I mean favor and just creating another category of groups, because basically they just need to advertise their mailing list, their slack channel in their meeting time, yeah.

F

Where's I think that actually concretely narrows the scope of working groups then, and the worst thing that could.

D

Happen is like a bunch of me glassware these things and it's well well, I think that's my insignia data hasn't been causing us any pain per se, so I actually think it would be a good thing to get more folks discussing, like cluster ops, really should have been kind of in this category as well. Yeah.

B

Well and I think that the idea is that this just calls attention to these things, because right now, if I the slide channel and mailing lists can be challenging because there's like gazillions of slack channels and stuff like that, I think.

D

They're about 90 the last time I checked, maybe they're they're, probably more by now, Aaron wants to say something: yeah.

H

So the the other group of six that make the question of buffs or user groups or support groups or whatever are the cloud provider SIG's. When we talk about how we want to fold everything under a single state called sick cloud provider, there are concerns that users use that, like single point of contact for their cloud provider of choice, I, don't.

F

Think they do, though, like we've been really effective in sick western lifecycle that they just the some projects, have leads and points they have their channels and it's just a sub project and it works really well, so they can have no meetings. Dude, okay,.

H

So I agree with all of these viewpoints and share them. I feel like that message hasn't gotten across I. Don't know sorry I'm speaking with last year's context, I haven't really caught up to this year. I did see. There's.

D

The other big last open issue, I'm aware of with respect to Sega's charters and working groups. Is this a cloud provider?

D

A consolidation read that there's assistance from some of the more established SIG's, the newer ones, I think care less, but the sagaie WS in particular seem to have concerns I.

C

Think one of the issues data is the spectrum of things that each cloud provider is doing something different, so the quicker we standardize it's going to be better for everyone, I think I'm, fine with using the sub projects under sick cloud code, and we basically just tell them. You are all going to do the same thing. Yeah.

F

I think I think if we wait for everybody we'll be waiting forever right, there needs to be like a time window, expiration date where you know, come to the comments to express your concerns and after some period of time it's if there's no forceful thing that we can't resolve, then we just kind of collapse them because in reality, doesn't.

I

To change anything.

F

That they're doing they're still gonna have the same meaning window times. They might change some slack channel names over time, but be very simple and I.

B

Think we can know I think we can structure the Charter for CID clouds. A little actually gives the appropriate power down to the sub-project, so they feel like they can still do the things that they want. They need to do. I think that was one of the concerns. There's a prestige aspect to it, but, like I'm, just you know, II.

H

Thought it right so I do you think cloud provider is pushing forward, I saw a draft was sent to me. I, don't know if it's public yet or not, but like this? Is the community doing this itself, which seems great if we need to have oversight over whether it's not being done quickly enough or whatever? We can.

F

Weigh in the other, there is.

H

F

I mean there are legit logistical problems that we do want to have a chokepoint right like documentation being one right. So from an architectural perspective, we do want to have like a sink cloud. You're responsible for you know your sub projects. Let's get some Doc's in honor.

H

Yeah I think another thing to realize: is there I'm gonna pick sick as your as an example? They have two sub projects. One's the cloud provider. Is your cool that obviously gets folded under your cloud provider? There's also cluster API provider, as your.

I

H

Okay cool so now there's one cloud provider: it's gotta have presence in two SIG's and they've lost that unifying one place to go for all things. A sure, I think.

D

That's already true: it's.

B

Already true well and actually honestly, that that sounds awesome, because people should be able to launch the Punisher without using the cloud providers to be a leader. Although.

J

I would say that, like I, like this idea of sort of distinguishing between working group and support group like I, feel like you should have an azure black channel. That seems totally reasonable for people to discuss. But it's not the same as the people doing. Work in Azure support the flux or API or whatever, and.

I

I think actually I.

J

Think actually doing this with big big data and the first cut to say: hey, you know if we really think this is actually more like a support group or burden I, don't care what we thought but establishing that new category. Actually, that helps the cloud provider thing, because we have done it once so. We say oh, and this is how we're doing it for all the cloud providers.

H

Okay, it sounds like violent agreement.

C

So quick interrupt there. So then we'll have three things in in the cloud product stuff for each cloud: product we'll have support group, and then we have a set of developers working on the cloud provider and a set of developers working on the cluster provider. The cluster API well.

J

My suggestion is, the support group is totally independent. Right, like there is a separate there's, a separate kubernetes community category called support groups or you know: I I'm, just I like.

I

Users, by the way user user.

J

Groups aside, I, don't care about the name, I'm just and then a personally separate category, it's very easy to create one, and you know really the only thing we're trying to try and do is maybe prevent overlap. So there isn't like big data and singular earth user.

I

J

Big data and user group, large data and user group- you know moderate that it away, but but other than that, that's a very low barrier to entry. It's creating those and those become the forums for user communication effectively. Okay,.

B

So, what's our action item out of this.

C

Okay, so the action item would be to make sure that we have a single sig, Club, Prada and all the others become sub projects of the sick club provider. I guess.

J

I would take it. I would take it a little bit more modular than that I would say the two actions. One action is to write up what it means to be a user group.

J

The other item is to turn Sigma data into one of these user groups and once we're done with that, then I think we'll have established the precedent that we need to make cloud providers. Oh yes,.

B

Alright so and I feel like, like writing up the idea of a user group or whatever and getting some socialization on that it's going to be, you know a bit of a bit of a project. Just you know to get folks used to that. Does somebody want to sign up to do that.

C

K

B

Gonna call up maybe to backstop you in review, but.

J

B

J

Up support groups: you have no I'm kidding, you.

G

B

What you do you I mean you know, that's that's what you get, but um you know the reason I'm not signing up this cuz I owe I owe some chapters I'm. The second addition to cleaver Denny's up and running so yeah.

J

I'm, just like doing my thumb until you I know, I know.

B

J

Son say you have to type it. You have to type it on your, not cork machine. So there isn't a Z in front of every word.

G

It turns out that was a DNA injection. I can't tell is.

J

That ready, you can't help it yeah kubernetes up and running, be next I know.

G

All right, I'm, just gonna, call you Brendan X.

B

All right all right, thanks for taking taking that on Brennan and I'm happy to backstop you in review. If.

J

It were clear, I'm thinking is the markdown file in community that yeah all right, yeah.

B

And I think at some point we may want to like have these things in SIG's diamo and generate as part of the other stuff, but that's can be separable from the socialization of it. Do we have a dog that's already.

F

Gonna lay out this is a sake. Is we.

B

Have that that's that's! The governance talk. There is one of those you know. Okay, so we'll just add it to that. So you say yeah, so I assume it's either a new doc or adding to that dog yep.

H

F

Ever so you have two Doc's.

H

Called governance, it's great! That's probably the one you're thinking of yeah yeah.

D

There's an open issue about that: okay,.

B

Did we get that action item resolved.

F

Sure we should write them, at least in sign of the issue.

F

B

B

Yeah we had it valuable.

D

So other other than something that's not in the project board. I didn't have time to put it there yet was. We were asked to review the code of conduct community charter, so I, don't think, there's been a lot of feedback on that yet know that okay, we.

B

Do we want to I mean like we have a little bit of time here? We don't have a super full thing. We want everybody to take like three minutes and read it now and see if we can just knock that out.

D

We can do that wearing. Is it.

H

I personally would like to defer that until we have Sarah involved, a number of the members of the Code of Conduct committee are lysed.

B

Him they were involved in drafting it, so it gets their implicit approval.

D

He's doing keynotes.

B

There's a Michelle, a wild Michelle appears.

B

This is the the code of conduct. Herder I was I'm, suggesting that, like maybe we can all take five minutes and read it. We see if you want to say yes now and skip some back and forth, but.

I

B

Ten pages: oh okay, yeah! No! That's more than five minutes on deck. I know.

G

About your reading skills, I.

D

B

Than two peaches for me to read: I.

D

Think there are things in that document that don't really need to be at a time per se and they have things about decision process, but also how the committee will actually function.

D

So it may actually need to be splitted in these two documents for about the Charter, the responsibilities of the committee and one about the process supposed.

B

Charter and bylaws type thing yeah.

I

D

That's what I that's what I was thinking I can make it in trouble. Actually, this document is not public right. That's why I didn't make an entry in the projects correct, yeah,.

I

D

I can put comic there without a link, though.

H

Do we want to keep running through the rest of the in progress column on the board, or we just sort of going loose here.

D

We can work yeah, we can do the in progress. That's that's good. I do have one item, that's not in the in progress that I want to follow up off the list to be in progress. First, okay, I think I did it as well. I.

H

Can I can do the sharing of the screen for the thing if I can find a window.

H

Okay, I think you're, seeing the board I'll try blowing it up a little bit if I can blocked I, don't even know if it's blocked or not. This is making sure all the repos have the same files. They they may now I'll check with Nikita afterwards, LTS I, don't think they're ready to bring their proposal to the steering committee.

H

This does kind of beg that question that I realized I got the the Charter for the Kate's in for a working group merged, but I, don't think I actually got a written vote from everybody. Did y'all see my email to the steering committee mailing list about that yesterday.

F

H

So I emailed the steering committee mailing list yesterday, I bumped the thread where I first sent out the PR and said hey I, think we should have a vote and as far as I can tell, we've talked about it meeting which I've linked on that PR and there were no objections other than the Charter looking to sake like so I updated it. The Charter got merge, that's great, but I only have a video recording of no objections.

H

I don't actually have a written, though so I either need people to go drop, algae teams on that PR or to consider whether we want to try and adopt a policy of. If it's a vote, then it should happen on the mailing list and I should get a call for a vote on the mailing lists. Do.

F

We do the lazy consensus thing anyways for all those things for.

H

Working groups the way it's documented, as it says, I need LG teams from a simple majority of the steering committee yeah.

D

H

Eight of 12, so I had simple majority yeah.

D

So Tim peppers kind of chase people down for the LTL working group. For that reason, and we should either clarify the existing process, you know whether she be LG teams or mailing lists or whatever, or we should change to the document to relax the process.

H

Like I'm I'm, applying following it as written and the process is like, you got a notify, steering that you need LG TMS, and then you count how many steering members LG TM it and then, when you have that on the PR you're good. But if that's the case, then my PR got merged too early and could y'all please get a drop LG teams on it. Just for yeah I, like.

I

H

I

Think we should stick to the LG Tammuz on the PR. Is it's just easier to follow and first, rather than go back and forth with that mailing and yes, I'll, go and check that yeah.

D

Just email needs to be sent to notify us of the existence of the PR because give notifications are worthless, I, agree, okay, so check steering email.

H

D

H

You haven't lately, it should be. There I think we already talked about the charters, Mehta issue, I, don't know, I can go open it up like I, don't know how? Yes.

D

H

About document what working groups are and how to form in this hint holy cow, it's been a rumor okay. Why is it still open? Let's go chase these team issues. One is we need to have a link baby? Okay, so apparently this PR needs to get merged, so maybe we can go chase through merging down this PR second thing. Yes, second thing is update six with more working group info. What we wanted to change here was to explicitly list the stakeholders sakes in a working group.

H

So if I go down here, a community member has actually taken a pass at a numerating all of the stakeholders, sakes for each of the different working groups, with references to how they figured all of that out and then Nikita has gone through and opened up a PR to actually implement this. So my question to you, the steering committee is: do you want to be involved in this, or do you feel like this? Is a sig contributor experience, concern I.

F

Don't think it needs our Proulx, don't.

H

Think it needs your approval, no.

F

It seems like it's just putting dining tonight and crossing the t's. Okay.

H

Just making sure, since we're talking a lot about the definition of working groups in this meeting, all right, formalizing sub projects again and again, people asked for sub projects to be these friendly things that were they recognized. They can have humans and human contact info in meetings and that sub projects are more than just a list of owners. Files I feel like clustered life cycle is a great demonstration and they kind of work but Tim I know you've expressed concerns about making these a little bit friendlier. How do you.

F

H

F

Inside of the it's just inside of the yamo file, it's there's a logistical thing, that's not a mystery, not we should do that or what the constraints are. That's like you know, we need a meta feed or so you.

H

Know like what I guess we can, we can add them at a field if, if that's the path of least resistance, my pushback has always been that we wanted to try and keep things dry and so say that sub projects are defined by people in the owners. Files, yeah.

F

The problem there is contact information, we need discoveries, so if they want to go to a slack Channel without the without the owners files. The donor present you get partial information, so high.

I

F

To like plunk down and find out where the mailing list is, what slack channel is for some projects so.

H

I'm happy to make sure that that kind of meta information is available for some projects, but again when it comes down to people I'm concerned that if you had a field, that's like chairs or organizers or whatever and then separately, there are owners files that have people's names in them. If those don't match, which is the one true source of the subproblem.

F

H

Flying about or just orders.

F

Files- that's totally fine with me. I don't particularly care. Okay, all right, I think the biggest issue. The issue that I commit done with the other pull requests is that we need metadata for people to discover. Ok,.

H

I think that's this issue right here. Brian your hand is up yeah.

D

So the open issues that I'm aware of the metadata is one the issue with duplicating the information on way back at the beginning, we had discussed having owners files specify what's the project they're part of so there are a bunch of issues with the owner files will thousands and thousands of voters files, and we would like to deduplicate them and consolidate the information even within the owners files.

D

So ideally, what projects would have a set of owners, approvers and reviewers all in one place, the other any other owner files that were needed would somehow refer to those, and we would have a tool that could automatically collate the owner file information and make sure it was in sync, with.

F

We really thought I think that's conflating this particular problem like I'd like to do that as it was two separate issue. Yes, it is a.

D

Separate issue I'm just saying no open, I agree.

H

With that, we can make more progress on that. If you can get more people to show up as staff to contributor experience and they get up management sub-project my evil plan there is to redo the owners mechanism to use github teams instead of the owners aliases file that way. Github teams are something we are working to automatically populate from files in a repo. So you know who's in the team and teams are accessible across the org and then the owners file can reference.

H

The team will still have a dereference, the team, so it actually calls out to specific people as opposed to assigning it to everybody, so nobody responds and that way you have that one canonical location for the team name, but it's still tied to owners files throughout the read. We just it's taking us time to get there because it is volunteer staff between myself, Erich Raeder, Christoph, Blocher and the other members of the github management sub project should.

D

We post roll to the roll board, see if we can get someone to volunteer to help more with game management. I feel like we have a bunch of those issues right right.

I

D

Then the other thing I don't think we have labels for sub projects, yet no Lance tag labels. We.

H

Don't what I have organically been doing is starting to had area labels to the repost that I want. My concern is, if you add, a label for every single sub project that we have. We may end up with, like a couple hundred labels spread across every single repo in the org. That probably doesn't make sense, so I've been trying to be a little more diligent and say, for example, the area conformance label only applies to new kubernetes kubernetes tests in front and community.

H

Since those are the three Phillipos where changes related to conformance land I was.

D

Thinking some project labels could replace the area labels. That's that's.

H

Totally fine, so these are all things that I could enumerate for contributor experience to own that and then get them to put out they you know, put help one it or send something out to a roll board and see if somebody picks that out, but my bandwidth is not as much as he not as great as it used to be. If somebody wants to help with that.

H

H

Clean up audit of working groups I believe this is our idea that there are some working groups that shouldn't be working groups. Did we already talked about that and where are we gonna shuffle room in that direction based on the BOP stuff? Yes,.

D

We talked about that. Okay.

H

uh Kubernetes license scanning I got sake, release to create this week, cig releases talking about making this an official sub project for them. I know that Stephen has talked about it, but Stephens going to be kind of afk for the next half of the month. Is there something that urgently needs to be addressed within the next half the month?.

C

Hi I've been thinking Stephen to at least do one run of the KK repository to see where we are and he promised to try to do it. This week, I went out back from him, I'll ping him later. Okay,.

H

That sounds good, yeah I believe he does have that access, because I got him to run a faster report on one of the repos. He was trying to donate to the project. Okay,.

H

Okay, there were some questions from people in contributor experience that it seems weird that the values for the project live off in the steering repo instead of in the community repo, or we have all of the other helpful info about the project, and so they were proposing that they remove the values file from the steering repo and move it into the root of the community. Repo I am by and large, in favor of this, because I think the community repo probably has more traffic and visibility than the steering repo.

H

The implications are, though, that the set of people who can approve changes to that values file grows beyond just the steering committee. Do we have a problem with that.

D

That can be addressed with.

H

Owners files right it could accept if we put it at the root of the repo. The set of people who have root owners. Privileges to the community. Repo is more than the steering committee I.

B

Guess I buy you lose control, yeah.

J

Exactly like we have starts control. Why are we worried nothing? I.

I

Mean I agree, source control legislate on that, but also we could put it in the steering directory under the community repo and then just preferences. But.

D

You can have per file owners so owners. We could specify that as reviewers or approvers for that file and in theory someone else could have proved it, but we would see presumably yeah.

I

H

Think there's a but that such that you can't have per file owners with the way owners are implemented. If you're talking about the fact that we use owners files can now support regular expressions to filter what their other fields apply to regular expressions and the approvers field don't play very well together. We have an issue open about that in tests infra. It works well enough for the case of like covering API files to make sure that only API reviewers can hit those, but it doesn't work terribly well for this kind of case.

H

The only other way that it's worked in the past by reading the ml metadata out of the headers of markdown files, okay,.

D

Oh in case I'm not super worried, but if we are worried, let's just put understeering directory I I'm.

H

Not worried it doesn't.

C

Sound like anybody's.

H

C

H

Not going either okay, that is everything that's in progress. I, don't feel a strong need to go through the backlog, but I can I kind of want to check back and see if people had stuff in the agenda and.

D

Something that I didn't get around to putting in the agenda but I again want to figure out how we can open up this meeting and, in general, make the steering committee more accessible, because there's no good way for people to bring business to us like in the case of getting a working group approved. The best they can do is email.

D

The steering mailing list so still the case that some people go to sick architecture, just because they're hoping to find someone who's on the steering committee, because they're open meetings- and it also just makes it hard for us to engage other people to help us do work watching a recording or the meeting or following and then following up. But he knows really not the same. So I'd really like to think about having office hours are alternating working private meetings or having a public part of this meeting or something.

D

Otherwise, it's going to be hard for us to mentor the next generation of leaders, for example, as well as offload and share more of the work and delegate the work like if the election this fall. If we, the ideal case, would be people would get elected that we're already doing work for the steering committee, but that's just really hard for us to get people involved. You know unless it's Aaron going to contributor experience for those specific areas, or you know Michelle working with the code of conduct committee.

D

You know it's all kind of one by one, so I like to think about how we can change that I. Don't think, there's any particularly great reason. For most most of these meetings to be private, the CFTC has mostly public meetings, we're discussing having alternating public and private just so, we can have more of working meetings, but.

F

With zoom it depends upon how we want to structure this. If you want it to be so wide open, then it becomes a problem right, because some people might want to come here just to come here or or you might have like a limited audience. Who can sometimes do now? A service tech, certain members of different things, sometimes do that.

F

So we can control the venue by having like a Q&A section where we could discuss topics or somehow on new participants, but I, don't know how how we want to structure the forum for involving the broader community yeah.

D

We talked about using sorry Michelle. We talked about using the new contributors sessions run by pairs, but that hasn't really been working to have an annual discussion or follow-up Michelle I think.

I

You should just like make our next meeting public and just go like business as usual and just see how it goes because I just wonder, I, don't know what to expect so I wonder: what's gonna happen, then we can kind of take that and process. It.

H

Another thought is whether we would want to increase the cadence of these meetings, so there's a biweekly private and a biweekly public.

I

F

I

If there's no each end item.

F

In the bi-weekly public you can plunge. Oh.

I

That's it really well.

B

I mean it's a bilingual public for the public, or is it just us doing our thing in public.

D

I'm thinking you know, if we want to get more people engaged on some of these issues, it would be helpful for them to be present when we discuss it. So we can get action items directly and allow a forum for them to ask questions, or if there are things that require our attention that are not getting attention through electronic means. The people have a way to follow up in person just to poke us and say hey. Nobody responded to this email or this pull request, or this slack message, or whatever I mean. What's the worst.

D

That could happen.

I

H

Asked that question out loud for me, you know it's worth.

C

An experiment, I'm kind of thinking, yeah I, think we should go with what Michele said open it and Brian said open it up to public and if necessary, we can have. We can schedule separate meeting private meetings of steering if, if needed, tell.

J

Me party we've already talked to the DA. It's like we're, recording right, turning recording on and off they're like here's the thing well.

B

I I think so in my mind: what's the worst that could happen. The worst that could happen is that somebody comes in and not maliciously, but they end up dominating the conversation such that the you know. We can't get business done and we can't actually cover the topics that we think we know.

F

Somebody sometime the moderator of the meeting I was.

H

Gonna say I would appreciate maybe Phil or Brian if you could tap Paris just unless anybody here has a ton of experience do being super tight on the moderation abilities available to us, because I notice, a gaps has had to deal with the problems that Tim has mentioned. But I just feel like having somebody who knows all the tools available at our disposal. Yeah.

I

That would be I would feel very comfortable if Paris moderated if she was for it. What.

D

Prevents other people from joining this meeting right now, private.

H

Calendar invite.

D

Yeah they just don't have to do linked correct so.

H

You can set the meeting up so that you can dump people into a lobby, and then somebody add them from the lobby, and you can also leave their settings to like prevent people. Speaking and.

B

In terms of pairs, I don't know if we need to have here to be the one moderating versus making sure we have the right. The meeting sent up in the right way step right.

H

Yeah I'm using Paris as proxy for the people who know all about moderation from contributor experience. I just know she helped write a lot of that guide. The.

D

Other thing we could do is make the agenda open and just add people who have agenda items. I would personally I.

H

Seems cooler to me I'm like I'm, totally fine, just being this open it up, seeing what happens yeah.

I

I'd like to go through the project board, because um you know this is like I, really I- think a lot of us believe in servant leadership, so I want to be able to tell people like hey. This is what we're working on and use this meeting or the please the first topic. We need to explain ourselves, you, like yeah, we're doing stuff or we didn't do this stuff and and go through the in progress column like you just did airing and then studying.

I

The second half was like open and people can bring things up and, if they're not appropriate for this venue, that I think we should just let them know that it's not appropriate for this venue right now,.

B

All right, um okay, I'll.

D

Reach out to Paris yeah.

B

And we'll probably want a separate set of like like if we want to do like an every other week, type of thing, I don't know, then we probably need a separate series of meetings and all that well.

D

We could announce the open in June de and then see how much demand there is virgin items well.

B

I think there's there's there's two overlapping topics, so one of these is open agenda where people can actually post agendas and actually bring business to us. The second thing is having people audit and then use that as a way to drive some engagement and and ways to actually have people take stuff on, even if they don't have agenda items right. So it's so like I think we could. We could drive involvement of a wider set of people as one goal and then having a forum for people to bring up new topics as a separate goal.

B

C

Can we also do it this making every week instead of every other week, because most of the time, what we end up doing is like just before the meeting we go, do all the steering stuff right. So why don't we I mean oh I'll propose.

B

And did somebody else want to talk I'm, sorry, my stepping on somebody. No oh.

H

You're fine I was just gonna. Tell tips, don't reveal our secrets, geez no.

B

I think I think like one of the things we could try, as we could take the off weeks of what we're on right now and we could actually have it be sort of an open steering committee.

B

Like you know, if people have business to bring have them bring that business if they don't, we go through the other thing and then everybody's free to audit it if they if they want to, and we can give that a try and see how things go, and you know my guess, is it won't get out of control and it'll be fine.

D

But it makes instead of working meetings like there's a lot of us here. There's a lot of people to get like work done well,.

I

We're gonna do.

D

That with the code of conduct charter but decided it would take too much time. Yeah I mean if there are easy things we can do if we can bring up an issue and resolve it in like one minute. We should definitely just do that. I did.

B

Lgt em that charter, though there you go.

E

Works so just to close out the opening, the steering committee meeting Brian Simms dr. pears about moderating who's gonna like notify people when's the next one that we're gonna do open.

D

I'll see if I can get feedback from Paris and then mail, you all with what the or cannot yeah.

B

I'm not happy to to if you want to pull me in on them. Brian like since I have the in vitam and doing the transfer to video keeping that process going. Does okay.

C

Let's follow up on the mailing list if we have to without having to wait till the next meeting, yeah.

D

So, are you using your FTO email for the indefinite future Joe.

B

I I have to switch everything over to my VMware, no mom, but via more you zoom. So.

I

B

Accounted that also, so is that.

H

hmm Two other things: that's cool, okay, the the first one just a meta point where, like we took some notes during our discussion of last week and then there's sorry during our discussion group therapy, face-to-face whatever you want to call it after cave, con, Michelle and I had an action item to follow up and take notes. I completely fell down on that Michelle has done a good chunk of note-taking, though I don't know if we actually finished and I certainly don't feel like. We got to a point where we can to still action items. I.

I

Think I had like maybe less than left on the recording. That meeting was hilarious and, let's never record a meeting again. Yes,.

B

It was it when was this, did I miss this one? Was this like.

H

The third or whatever yeah this was this- was our face-to-face, where, like I, stood up and revealed after the fact that I had been recording it because.

B

Of that yeah no yeah.

I

H

Well, you, you used the hard word, but so just like there's there's a private dock where we're taking some notes, because there was a lot of thoughtful discussion, some more some of it more colorful than other parts of it and we'll come back with some action items, but TBD on that. If y'all are cool with that, you know, you'll know when we're done so to speak.

H

Okay, the other thing that was sort of brought up during yesterday's cig release meeting is the product security team has all of their Doc's inside of the cig, release repo, but I, don't think there sub-project of cig release. So we were talking about hey. What's the formal governance structure for the product security team, do we call it?

H

The committee seems like the closest word for it, if you view committee as an entity that has sort of a rotating staff and can have public and private meetings and stuff like that Brandon, do you want to speak to that a little bit yeah.

E

I intended to do it I, just I, don't ever remember if we ever documented by the committee is I.

H

Kind of feel like we haven't is the thing the committee is the catch-all for its special anyways. We.

B

Had a, we had a Foursquare thing right: yeah in that governance, not MD, there's a definition of committees. What God is there and we said some top six? Is security or code of conduct required discretion, whereas SIG's are voluntary? Groups was operated in the open? Anyone joint committees do not have open. Membership do not always operate in the open. The steering committees is needed for Brown and remaining duration. Membership of a committee is decided by the steering committee like I, said.

B

Get committee has a Charter and a chair and will report to the steering committee periodically and to the community, as it makes sense. Given the Charter and.

E

That's it well I'll, put up an issue and.

H

Yeah, it's like the most productive steering committee.

F

H

You've ever had Wow great job, another new committee, I love. It.

B

Yeah I think that students acuity was definitely one of the things that we had in mind when we defined committee, so yeah I forgot.

E

There process so that's great, although also we're missing a link to the kept process and this DAF that was just linked.

H

Just a fun fact on caps, not that I think we have any say in it, but I've been going around being a bull in a china shop with caps. I've talked to a bunch of six dude with my really with my desire to have everything lands in their lease. Have a cap associated with it say p.m. is kind of coming back to life and a bunch of people want to help out. I am suggesting that CPM be be stewards of the process and that saving architecture be the stewards of the decision-making involved in Kemps.

H

It's kind of the same people who bounce back and forth between these right now in terms of ownership of this I think like cig architecture, is the one proper forum to talk about that. We have strong opinions well,.

D

I'm sig architecture definitely has opinions are about what the cap content should be. Yeah.

B

I think architecture has opinions about everything we.

D

Do but I think I care more about the content, make sure the right questions are asked. You know like we were talking about. How do we raise the quality bar? They clear the testing requirements, the documentation requirements, the monitoring requirements or whatever, and how that relates to an API, API review process and weand.

D

What parts of the API should be in the cap versus done separately and stuff like that? So you know there are definitely details relevant to cig architecture, but in terms of the overall process, I think getting some project management help from San Kim would be a nice.

D

Something we used to do back from the project was much smaller is actually be more explicit about the project's capacity for change and I think would be helpful to go back to that to say no. This is a good idea, but can't do it right now, because we have too many other things going on. I think would help I just started looking through I just triage, my email from September and friend. That's all when I found things that were stalled since July, you know, so it's just super hard to keep track of everything.

D

That's going on now, so I.

B

This sounds like a great discussion. Is this a steering committee discussion? It.

H

It's not I was just giving a heads up because I think, like Brian said, there are a lot of sinks that this cuts across and you all attend a bunch of different sakes and we close all of your input. But the focal point like the concern I have is sig release, sig, architectures, CPM all have opinions, and so, if I'm being able and it's trying to chop and try to push some stuff forward and change some things, I'm gonna have to involve all three of them. I, really love to reduce that downtown-1 I.

B

I, just I think that you know for cross sig coordination. We can't use the steering committee as sort of the veto thing here, so I think.

H

B

I know you're not I, know you're, not, but I. Think it's just like say: hey I want agree, sound one item targets during committee boom I, don't have to actually like. Please. You know enough.

D

B

D

Almost nothing amongst sig, meats and chairs, although maybe we try to use that form.

H

Sure I will give a heads up out there I think.

B

You know I I'd like to believe that a concrete plan sent to the mailing lists across those things. That's reasonable should move pretty fast, but maybe I'm, maybe I'm crazy, yeah.

C

Last time I sent something people said they don't read that email well.

C

Okay, so I added a couple of things to links to the doc. There's a security audit. There was a sanitized version of the proposal. It's I, don't know how many people have seen it and then the other one was CNCs maintain us mailing list. There was a link to report, cumulus, media and velocity. Please take a look at those two things see, maybe there's some stuff that we will probably have to do.

D

So one interesting thing: I took a glance at the medium-velocity report. Is they have information about social media activity and press activity for each kubernetes release?

D

So that might be something to pay attention to you about how that's changing over time? You know: we've been talking about communities getting boring, I, think that is messages being received and that there seems to be less reaction to some of the recent communities releases. So you might want to think about whether that's a good thing or not a good thing. I, don't know, I haven't decided. 112 is interesting. There was less interest in 112 and when I read the 112 release, notes, I thought yeah doesn't seem very exciting, but I think also.

D

The work that was done in 112 wasn't communicated very well through the release notes. So.

D

Yeah I don't know what to take away from that. Maybe help help more with articulating. What's going on and the release or provide better guidance to people about what to highlight in the release, notes.

A

So I wanted to add to that, like on cube being boring, I had a couple of people commenting to me that the new kept process is so much BS and extra work work that they just don't want to add features and I would for a second I was like it kind of sounds like what we intended way, but it wasn't. It wasn't daring.

A

But it was the the perception from like that. There's a slower process was nothing that I heard people reflect back so along the lens LaFrance, yeah and Adam is going around bashing.

C

People up for not filing caps to try.

H

To just talk to Joe's point about like communicating clear process problem is I, don't have a clear crisp process. I still feel like we're at a point where we're iterating through this, so it's gonna be a little bit bumpy. Uh-Huh.

D

I think that's fine. The there's still.

H

D

Open design proposals in the community area, though, like following the pre kept process such.

B

As yeah, so so clay knew with respect to the you know, if you're, if you're getting pushback on the cap process, I think it's worth saying what is the experience for folks who know how to like reach out to Clayton and get an approval versus? What is the experience for folks who you know, don't have you know first door access and.

A

It was, it was more. The comments that I was getting were more from. People who worked on the project for a while and kind of know like who are in some cases were people who were involved in SIG's, and so this is that it's like that. What about the people who work on SIG's day-to-day, it's kind of just like we've, always said that we should do proposals, so some of it is just a little bit like it.

F

Depends on the state everything in sequester lifecycle. We've been doing this already still like we've we've been, we have kept spur caps right now. We have quite.

A

A few so API machinery was also very navel-gazing on proposals. They just never surfaced up out, but like just some of this is like I think some of it is. It is perceived as a difference, even though in practice for anybody who's in a cig, we're looking for her who's been working. The project a while, like it shouldn't, be a surprise for most people. It's just more of the like. Oh I, have to go talk to these other SIG's or I have to go, do process versus getting alignment.

A

So it's having the effect I think we intend and.

B

I hope that, like you know, if it doesn't cross state boundaries, then it's how you know it's. It's kind of like.

A

And it's interesting because there's definitely caps that have happened in a sigmund REE that we want to talk about at a larger level and cigar has picked up. Some of that, like you know, people go and being more willing to talk to cigar, but I. Think some of the like.

A

K

We got the open, we're already doing the open stare committee meeting. You show on your point. If it doesn't cross state boundaries, so I mean my understanding. Was that we're asking every enhancement, no matter across the sig band you're not to be captured with a cat.

B

So I think that's one of those things that I think is in flight a little bit but I think some of it is that like should it be written down, so it can be communicated as one thing and does the approval process for that cab actually reach outside the sick, right and I. Think that like, if, if it doesn't crossing boundaries, then like we, we may and I think this is. This is the stuff that Aaron's comments table on.

B

We may want to say: okay, you have to at least write some stuff down right so that people can see.

K

That punch back I've also heard, and is that if it doesn't cross the state boundary I've already written it down the PR I'm just doing more for paperwork that I have to approve, then approve DPR and I'm, not saying it's a bad thing. Just that is the feedback that I guess. We've done from those who've been on, though,.

B

And what I would say is that if you're only documentation is the PR, that's probably not a good thing.

E

F

Is totally not germane to steering this is like totally hard conversations, so Chloe.

A

Slowing down the project so that it feels more stable was a goal we had talked about. It seems to be having an effect. Yeah and I would.

K

Say it's also challenging the like yeah somebody perceiving III I struggled this a little bit because, as Brian said like, if we don't get people wanting to participate or equip more too many barriers up, then we'll continue to have the symptom that Brian talked about some degree in I. Guess it's for all of us to decide. That's a good or a bad thing, but that's far, I I think it's worth knowing like the feedback. At least we've done. Maybe you guys, you know so.

C

Do we talk about this tomorrow in Sagarika, textured.

D

We're on the agenda over.

H

There, because I want to try and suggest that the discussions about the experience of it and the friction of it, our best fostered by sake p.m. to make the experience, but the IMP like making sure the right information shows up in there is what sick architecture kind of cares about, but we yeah I agree. We can totally talk about it there. This is where we're at time. Actually, okay I have to go Thanks, happy 2019, everybody bye.

C

Everyone, let's go.