►
From YouTube: Steering Committee 20180523
Description
The bulk of this meeting was private as we discussed Code of Conduct issues and forming the Code of Conduct Committee
A
One
of
the
things
that
did
come
up
and
Sara
took
an
action
item
around
that
was
to
have
some
office
hours
for
the
steering
committee
where
folks
can
bring
business
before
the
committee
and
so
we're
going
to
get
that
scheduled
once
a
month
dish
along
with
instructions
and
how
people
can
put
stuff
on
the
agenda
there
and
what
the
schedule
looks
like
so
so
that's
business
that
we
covered
up
until
now.
Tim
you
had
some
other
stuff
that
you
wanted
to
cover.
B
There
was
one
question:
I
said
to
the
email
list:
I,
don't
know
if
I
get
a
response
back
yet,
but
it
was
policy
with
regards
to
the
lifecycle
of
repositories
that
we
create
underneath
the
kubernetes
SIG's
board,
and
there
was
a
it
was
raised
because
we
wanted
a
cluster
lifecycle
wanted
to
sponsor
something.
But
we
also
wanted
to
have
a
potential
deprecation
policy,
and
where
do
those
things
go?
How
does
it
get
booted
out?
Is
there
it
do?
We
have
an
attic?
I
am
what
is
that?
What
is
the
process
there?
C
Don't
have
a
process,
but
we
do
have
an
attic.
The
kubernetes
retired
org
is
where
we
moved
a
few
repos.
We
used
to
have
three
separate
words
for
this,
in
fact,
but
we
consolidated
them
Thank,
You
Erin
for
consolidating
all
the
different
graveyards
and
retires
and
whatever.
But
now
it's
a
delete
just
to
Annette,
he's
retired
and
in
the
past
has
been
pretty
obvious,
like
the
old
cube,
UI
and
maybe
cute
cube
and
some
other
things
nope,
where
there
was
no
activity
and
no
maintain
errs.
C
We
eventually
just
said
on
email
to
companies,
death
and
said:
hey
does
anybody
care
and
nobody
answered,
so
we
moved
them,
but
it
would
be
great
if
we
could
use
dev
stats
to
monitor
activities.
So
we
could
say:
hey
activity
has
gone
to
zero
and
we
should
consider
retiring
in
for
projects
that
we
want
to
boot
out
of
the
project
that
are
still
active,
that's
something
we
haven't
done
before.
B
C
Asked
this
question
and
since
you
have
already
said
no
just
boot
him
out,
in
fact,
if
we
don't
want
the
repo
at
all
anymore,
I
mean
I
was
thinking
we
would
remove
the
repo
to
retired
and
just
tell
them
to
fork
it,
but
if
they
actually
want
the
issues
and
everything-
and
we
don't
actually
want
it
at
all,
it
seems
he
have
said
it's
fine
for
us
to
just
give
them
the
whole,
give
them
the
whole
repo
or
actual
repo.
What.
C
A
C
A
Gonna
dodge
it
with
with
helm,
since
you
know
it's
moving
from
CN
CF
to
CN
CF
right,
so
we
don't
have
to
answer
that
question.
Yeah
I
just
think
I
think
about
something
like
cops
right.
Cuz,
like
you
know
with
with
you,
know,
Justin
and
Google.
It's
not
clear,
you
know,
I,
don't
I,
don't
have
a
good
vision
or
a
good
insight
into
what
the
future.
That
project
looks
like
yeah,.
C
A
I
agree
with
that.
I
mean
that's
separable
from
the
sort
of
like
okay,
here's
a
here's,
a
project
that
has
a
lot
of
users
has
a
logo,
but
the
amount
of
folks
working
on
it
is
sort
of
like
you
know.
This
is
going
to
put
us
in
an
awkward
position
here
and
I'm
not
sure
exactly
what
the
future
there
looks
like
yeah.
D
C
We
have
this
issue
with
the
kubernetes
dashboard.
Already
I
mean
it
doesn't
have
a
logo
or
whatever,
but
if
anybody
wants
an
open-source
dashboard
to
use
with
mini
queue-
or
you
know
just
downloading
kubernetes
from
github
or
whatever
I
think
the
dashboard
is
useful,
but
most
the
partners
who
are
helping
with
that
are
no
longer
helping
with
that.
So
there
were
some
people
who
said
they
were
interested
in
contributing,
so
hopefully
they
will,
but
that's
definitely
something
it.
We
should
identify
some
metrics
that
we
actually
want
to
monitor
from
all
these
repos.
C
F
B
Think
there's
a
prettiest
obvious
state
I,
don't
know
whether
or
not
we
want
to
create
a
formalized
policy,
but
I
do
think
that
we
need
to
probably
update
the
document
that
was
originally
emerged.
That
outlined
Brendan's
proposal
to
have
details
on
retirement.
That
probably
makes
sense,
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
get
to
the
point
of
metrics.
We
maybe
say
something
simple
as
like:
zero
to
one
maintain
or
something
then,
eventually
over
time,
I'm
happy
to
add
something
to
that
dog.
B
So
the
the
only
other
thing
that
I
had
on
my
list
that
I
was
aware
of
from
the
emails
was
Michelle
mentioned.
A
backlog
needs
some
grooming,
I,
don't
know
if
that
was
done
or
if
folks
wanted
to
have
a
separate
little
strike
force
to
address
that.
So
every
time
we
come
to
this
meeting,
we're
starting
to
like
burn
through
the
agenda
and
the
backlog.
Well,.
C
G
F
F
Jase
offered
to
move
all
the
text
in
our
backlog
that
MB
file
to
issues
so
I,
just
I
kind
of
raised
that
in
the
email
just
to
make
sure
everybody's
cool
with
that
I.
Don't
people
want
to
do
free,
free
work
here,
I'm,
not
gonna,
say
no
and
Jase
is
great,
so
he
he
offered
to
do
some
of
that.
Like
kind
of
project
management,
type
type
thing
for
us,
some
so
yeah,
he'll,
he'll,
move
those
way.
C
F
F
F
C
I
I
reviewed
some
charters
that
I
know
this.
The
gaps
one
is
matt
says,
is
ready,
but
you
know
they're
on
the
order
of
half
a
dozen
sig
architectures
is
on
hold
a
little
bit
right
now,
as
we
try
to
figure
out
what
the
main
thing
said:
architectures
trying
to
do
our
but
and
how
we
want
it
to
be
structured,
but
the
yeah
I
think
sig,
note
Derick
prayed
the
signal
charter.
Six
scalability
is
out
contributor
experience
already
merged
there's,
so
we
do
have
a
body
to
review.
C
There
were
some
issues
with
the
template
that
I
encountered
trying
to
write
a
charter,
there's
some
language
about
removing
people
if
they're
unavailable
for
or
unresponsive
for
three
months
or
whatever,
but
it
doesn't
say
how
to
determine
whether
they're,
responsive
or
what
the
process
is
for
removing
them
like
who
gets
to
decide
who
removes
them.
Things
like
that
or
it
there's
also
some
things
about,
if
they're
not
doing
their
duties
and
remove
them,
and
if
there
were
issues
that
came
up
like
well.
G
Brian
I
think
I
tried
to
address
some
of
those
in
the
signal.
Well,
actually,
because
I
remember
the
three
month,
one
being
painful,
because
it
basically
meant
you
couldn't
take
maternity
leave,
which
I
thought
was
not
really
the
greatest
wave.
That's
putting
that
out
there,
but
yeah
I,
guess
some
of
those
in
at
least
the
signal,
and
we
should
maybe
want
to
roll
that
back
in
yeah.
C
B
C
G
C
C
I
believe
it
should
be
totally
fine.
They
already
can
have
their
own
slack
channels,
but
they
should
be
listed
in
the
60
M,
the
60
ml.
So
that's
better,
discoverable!
Okay,
thank
you
because
that's
if
sub
projects
need
their
own
mailing
lists,
slack
channels
or
meetings,
then
I
think
that's
appropriate
one
of
the
biggest
demands
we
get
for
additional.
A
And
I
mean
my
my
my
assumption
here.
That
also
is
that
it's
you
know
the
sig
Carter
could
be
modified
written
such
that
you
know
powers
that
the
sig
has
can
be
invested
into
certain
folks
in
leadership
position
in
those
sub
projects
and
so
like.
Creating
new
sub
projects.
I
think
it's
reasonable
to
say
that
hey,
you
know
leads
of
sub
projects
can
create
new
sub
projects
that
are
associated
with
that.
This
wouldn't
be
a
hierarchy
of
sub
projects,
but
yet
rather
a
distribution
of
powers
to
be
able
to
create
sub
projects.
A
Honestly,
the
ground
around
the
the
sync
provider
stuff
and
the
discussions
that
are
going
on
there
all
right
all
right.
So
as
we
look
to
sort
of
fold
SIG's
in
it,
may
you
know,
as
we
create
sort
of
conglomerate
SIG's,
it
may
make
sense
to
actually
you
know,
have
you
know
more
custom
charters
for
those
for
those
types
of
structures
after
monado.
A
F
B
Right
so
Brendan
said
he
would
PR
the
the
process.
Stock
Michelle
said
that
she'd
sync
with
Jase,
and
hopefully
we
have
a
backlog
within
a
month.
Fish
timeframe
and
links
to
the
Code
of
Conduct
document
would
be
helpful
in
this
main
thing.
Yeah,
that's
about
it,
there's
a
lot
of
other
comments
in
the
notes,
but
there
aren't
mr.
actions
I.
Think.
C
F
And
I
had
an
action
item
from
last
week
that
I
didn't
complete,
which
was
to
define
the
meta
process
for
reviewing
those
traders.
So
I
will
follow
up
on
that
this
week,
and
so
ever
it
has
kind
of
like
an
outline
of
what
things
still
up
for
the
court
on
that,
and
also
please,
please
nominate
people
for
the
code
of
conduct
committee
I.