From ef1c0b2822d3dfa867049af4a43f102f4ee396b2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastien Goasguen Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2017 15:26:03 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] change a few priorities and add a few items --- backlog.md | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/backlog.md b/backlog.md index 2650bba..cc203ee 100644 --- a/backlog.md +++ b/backlog.md @@ -5,7 +5,26 @@ This is a backlog of items that the steering committee needs to either handle or ## Backlog Items -- Check the governance documents into the community repo +- Check the bootstrapping governance documents into the community repo +- Write project wide governance once steering committee is in place: + - Identify how the governance documents can be changed + - Describe the GitHub multi-organization strategy and how new org can be created + - Describe how SIGs are created, governed and how they interact with the steering committee + - Update incubator process based on new governance and new GitHub organization strategy + - Committee decision-making process (e.g., modified lazy consensus seeking) and quorum requirement + - Improve/expand definition of members of standing + - Simplify the contributor ladder + +- SIG charter template, including suggested governance and minimum required intra-SIG governance, its scope + (topics, subsystems, code repos and directories), responsibilities, areas of authority, how members and roles + of authority/leadership are selected/granted, how decisions are made, and how conflicts are resolved. +- Formalize the concept of subprojects +- Decide how/whether ecosystem subprojects (e.g., kops, helm) are governed differently +- In particular, develop policies/procedures for donated code (e.g., helm, kubernetes-anywhere, kompose, kargo) +- Resolve the disconnect between code organization (OWNERS, maintainers) and people organization (SIGs) +- Define roles and responsibilities of incubator mentor/sponsor and graduation process. +- Identify where the community lives (e.g slack, google group) so it can be reached +- Identify where and how decisions are made (e.g slack, google group, SIG, kubernetes-dev, GitHub) - Clarify the interface with the CNCF - Update the Code of Conduct Committee to a more recent version, documenting enforcement, broaden coverage beyond maintainers and committers, coding activities, and project/public spaces, specify our own reporting @@ -14,26 +33,19 @@ This is a backlog of items that the steering committee needs to either handle or - Determine how members of the Code of Conduct Committee should be selected - Document resources that the community has and make sure they have a home: releases, twitter handles, etc - Find homes for unowned areas of the project, such as the build system -- SIG charter template, including suggested governance and minimum required intra-SIG governance, its scope - (topics, subsystems, code repos and directories), responsibilities, areas of authority, how members and roles - of authority/leadership are selected/granted, how decisions are made, and how conflicts are resolved -- Formalize the concept of subprojects -- Decide how/whether ecosystem subprojects (e.g., kops, helm) are governed differently -- In particular, develop policies/procedures for donated code (e.g., helm, kubernetes-anywhere, kompose, kargo) -- Resolve the disconnect between code organization (OWNERS, maintainers) and people organization (SIGs) -- Simplify the contributor ladder -- Update incubator process to explain new GitHub organization strategy + + - Explicitly delegate areas to SIGs - Escalation process - Fund-requesting and budget processes -- Committee decision-making process (e.g., modified lazy consensus seeking) and quorum requirement -- Improve/expand definition of members of standing -- Identify who is responsible for evolving the governance going forward and how changes will be approved - Project-wide communication requirements, processes, and mechanisms +- Develop processes to address staffing gaps (engineering, docs, test, release, ...), effort gaps + (tragedy of the commons), expertise mismatches, priority conflicts, personnel conflicts + +### Open Questions: + - Do we need user groups? - Do we need insurance? - Do we need a policy similar to [Apache's release policy](http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html)? - Update project values - Do we need a Conflict of Interest policy? -- Develop processes to address staffing gaps (engineering, docs, test, release, ...), effort gaps - (tragedy of the commons), expertise mismatches, priority conflicts, personnel conflicts