current community infra issues / gsuite

[parispittman]

we have contributors@kubernetes.io (and many others)

following up on steering committee meeting re: issues with current set up/gsuite, reasons why we want to talk to someone at gsuite, etc.

UPDATE: @mrbobbytables added community mailing lists to a k8s.io group that auto feeds into the calendar now. This could be an ok solution for right now.
1- calendaring: some sigs are following the guidelines we've laid out as best practice but how can we make this better? this requires 40+ shared calendars with chairs needing to keep up on access perms and maintenance of their calendars. can we centralize this and still share ownership with sigs/chairs/people who need it? can we use the gsuite api to make this better? can sigs.yaml power the calendar?
why this is an issue/past issues: sig meetings not showing up on community calendar, calendar owner is no longer here - temp or perm - to edit/cancel/delete/reschedule, invite not set up correctly (transparency perms, no info, etc.)

UPDATE: still an issue
2- documentation ownership: individuals own docs vs the project. can we centralize this and still share ownership with sigs/chairs/people who need it? can we use the gsuite api to make this better? can we use team drive in places that make sense like storing of contribex files that don't go in a github repo? Current issue with gsuite: we don't have access to create team drives.
why this is an issue/past issues:: can't transfer ownership of document after someone goes MIA, permissions issues when creating, sharing issues

UDPATE: still an issue
3- more youtube automation research: zoom cloud to google contributor@ sig buckets -> youtube playlists.
currently use splain but can have problems; zoom cloud is a back up if something fails and we need to manually upload

[idvoretskyi]

/cc

[parispittman]

@philips - is this enough to warrant a call with google now? anything else needed? i talked to a gsuite customer rep at NEXT and told them the situation and they said that this is what they do and can help us. supposedly there are features for nonprofits, like a ton more users than standard, that we can take advantage of. just want to get someone on the phone.

[philips]

5- can we automate github processes like rewards and rec systems to use gsuite to generate emails, calendar events, etc.?

What is this? Can you expand this?

I think all of these requests are reasonable and the scope seems tight enough to have a good conversation. Any other input @michelleN ?

[philips]

@parispittman I have the ability to make support requests via the Gsuite admin console. Could you draft the email you want me to send to them?

[cblecker]

related: kubernetes/k8s.io#228

[parispittman]

@philips sorry ive been out; super sick.

how's something like this?

We wanted to talk to someone about our current organizational structure and how we can best use gsuite to accomplish our goals. We’ve run into some roadblocks with our current gsuite configuration. One example, is the current issues surrounding accounts that should be shared by a group to give them one voice (e.g. contributor@kubernetes.io). Currently this requires passing around credentials; it works, but does not feel sustainable. We also have docs that are owned at individual levels and would like to potentially use team drive for this; however, we can't figure out how to enable Team Drive on the account. We are also managing 40 individual calendar entries on a shared calendar that isn't owned by our gsuite and would like to know how to better manage this or if what we are doing is the right path.

[philips]

@parispittman sent.

[dims]

fyi the k8s-infra working group will be using the google groups under kubernetes.io for granting permissions to community resources (switching over from using public google groups). please see kubernetes/k8s.io#228 for details

[parispittman]

gsuite got back to philips with this:

Basically to cover your first query about shared accounts I would like to suggest for you to read up on the Collaborative inbox, as this is in my opinion closes I've found to compensate for the shared account accessible by certain users. You can read up in more detail in this article here:
https://support.google.com/a/answer/167430?hl=en
action for us: need an owner for this or I'll pick back up when I get extra cycles. problems are above and can discuss further, too. we need a plan on how we should set up users. (example: should sigs have lists under here and so that they aren't individually owned and project owned?)

To cover your second query related to Team Drive enabling in short words the basic edition of G Suite does not support Team Drives, hence the reason why you were unable to locate the options for this. The edition supporting Team Drive feature are G Suite Enterprise, Business, or Education editions. More details on Team Drives can be found here:
https://gsuite.google.com/learning-center/products/drive/get-started-team-drive/#!/
actions for us: if we want team drive, we need to upgrade gsuite and get new approvals?

And lastly to cover your query about Shared Calendar not owned by your G Suite I can suggest export of the Calendar, and Import to your domain. This will copy the events (if by calendar entries you mean events) and make your G Suite owner of it for easier management, however from that point on wards your users would need to make events on the newly imported and re-shared Calendar as there is no way to link them to do this automatically. Steps and guides for exporting can be found here:
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37111?hl=en
and for importing here:
https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37118
action: needs an owner. someone with access to the contributors@ account needs to test this.

[parispittman]

conversations around security and the use of zoom has come up around the community. one possible solution would be the use of meet chat on gsuite which now has a capacity for 100 on the editions mentioned by the gsuite rep above. the positive would be easy livestreaming via youtube and records of all SIG meetings without individuals owning them. need to look into further: global access

[fejta-bot]

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

[parispittman]

/remove-lifecycle stale

[fejta-bot]

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

[parispittman]

/remove-lifecycle stale

most of this is still applicable. the priority would be the team drive so we can play with splain's automation features for youtube which is a more solid connection than the current pipe.

[ezzoueidi]

/cc

[mbbroberg]

/remove-area contributor-comms

[spiffxp]

Some prior art for managing Google calendar https://github.com/sethvargo/terraform-provider-googlecalendar

[fejta-bot]

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle stale

[spiffxp]

Opened kubernetes/steering#213 as a placeholder for a proposal to address these issues

[spiffxp]

/remove-lifecycle stale

[spiffxp]

/milestone v1.23

[spiffxp]

/priority backlog

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Mark this issue or PR as rotten with /lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[parispittman]

with the migration efforts which will help with documentation the best we can, we can close this. also setting new fresh YouTube related issues.

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@parispittman: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

with the migration efforts which will help with documentation the best we can, we can close this. also setting new fresh YouTube related issues.

/close

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.