Adding initial directions for kubernetes organization owners #1569

mattfarina · 2018-01-05T22:05:31Z

cc @kubernetes/steering-committee @idvoretskyi

I think I have this right but I'm not sure. After some conversations in December I wanted to capture what I'd learned in writing.

spiffxp · 2018-01-05T22:09:29Z

/assign
/committee steering
I'll look at this today or next week, I'm now sitting on a number of kubernetes orgs and would like to make sure what I'm doing is correct and documented here

ref: #1407

idvoretskyi · 2018-01-05T22:47:27Z

/assign

@spiffxp I'd like to work on this as well from the CNCF side.

bgrant0607 · 2018-01-11T07:16:26Z

org-owners-guide.md

+to for CNCF compliance and for the guidelines of the community.
+
+## Organization Naming
+


I agree with this section.

bgrant0607 · 2018-01-11T07:20:23Z

org-owners-guide.md

+
+## Contributor License Agreement (CLA)
+
+All code contribute to the Kubernetes project needs to be done by those who are


This is transitioning from orgs to repos, for which we have other docs:

https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/governance.md#repository-guidelines
https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/governance.md#cla
https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/governance.md#code-of-conduct
https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/incubator.md#creation-of-the-incubator-project
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project

Maybe just link to them from here? Or otherwise consolidate this content somehow?

@bgrant0607 Since the incubation process is not in use and repos, such as those under kubernetes-client, are not part of the incubator, I would suggest we move the requirements for orgs and repos out of there and reference back here. Going forward it appears we will have multiple types of things.

CLA is activated/configured per-org AFAIK, that should be in this doc about kubernetes orgs.

Code of Conduct, Software License are are repo-level specs. I don't think they belong in this doc.
I think it would be simpler to say all repos in a kubernetes org must adhere to the standards
set by https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project and make sure that's a living example (eg: I'm about go to PR out the wording about incubator)

I like Aaron's proposal.

Opened kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project#14

There are two things that catch my attention here.

We already have numerous existing projects not based on this template. Those managing those repos and the orgs they are on need clear guidance on what they MUST do apart from what's RECOMMENDED. Many of those org and repo owners don't have those details. This document was an attempt to serve existing as well as new. How do we concisely communicate to these folks?

The template repo has a lot of implementation opinions. For example, all maintainers must LGTM a release and for dependencies you use godep. Where is the line between what one MUST do and what's RECOMMENDED? The template project doesn't seem to share that.

Shouldn't a template implement a set of guidance to be helpful rather than be the source of truth? At least for all those cases of communication that a template isn't well suited for (e.g., after day-0 project creation).

I guess if we're going to go to full blown RFC compliant wording, I'd still prefer to see that wording over in kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project. I am open to PR's that clearly demarcate opinions from requirements.

As far as reconciling the state of kubernetes repos today with the desired state is concerned, I see no difference between updating a living example after the fact and updating docs after the fact.

@spiffxp so I can update the wording here as a pointer. Repo maintainers need to:

Watch for changes on the template repo

Figure out the ones that apply to them

Apply them to their own repos

What I don't know is what parts of the example apply to all repo and which don't. Some things are required, such as the code of conduct, which other things are optional, such as the use of godep (glide, dep, and godep are in use right now). How do repo maintainers distinguish the types of things? How do we communicate that as guidance?

@mattfarina I think clear wording in https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project/blob/master/README.md would help distinguish what is required vs. recommended. For example, we don't say "use this CONTRIBUTING.md file that references godep", we say "use a CONTRIBUTING.md file" and provide an example.

Communicating this guidance would probably best take place on the kubernetes-dev mailing list as we come to a consensus on when and how best to enforce project-wide standards

+1 on pointing to kubernetes-template-project and communicating guidance on what repo maintainers need to do via the kubernetes-dev mailing list for now.

What do we think about having a Guide to Upgrading Your Kubernetes Repo doc that you can link here with the directions Matt Farina mentioned and use that as the guidance we send to the kubernetes-dev mailing list?

bgrant0607 · 2018-01-11T07:21:03Z

org-owners-guide.md

+
+## Transferring Outside Code Into A Kubernetes Organization
+
+Due to licensing and CLA issues, prior to transferring software into a Kubernetes


This is fine for now.

bgrant0607 · 2018-01-11T07:22:08Z

org-owners-guide.md

+* kubernetes-graveyard
+* kubernetes-csi
+
+This list is likely incomplete. If you are aware of additions please contribute


I believe the list is still being hashed out elsewhere.

We've since hashed this list out #1407 (comment)

cblecker

LGTM

spiffxp · 2018-01-17T17:53:34Z

org-owners-guide.md

@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+# GitHub Organization Owners Guide


Could we retitle this Kubernetes Github Organizations?

michelleN · 2018-01-17T18:45:34Z

org-owners-guide.md

+
+Note: The CNCF, as part of the Linux Foundation, holds the trademark on the
+Kubernetes name. All GitHub organizations with Kubernetes in the name should be
+managed by the Kubernetes project or use a different name.


^ is that something we can actually enforce? I'm not pushing back here, just curious.

@michelleN if the CNCF doesn't enforce the trademark on the name than it can loose the ability to do this. It's a general thing that you need to enforce usage on a name or you loose the right to. It's legal and as I'm not a lawyer I don't really know the details. I'm sure the Linux Foundation and CNCF folks know what to do, though.

Because the CNCF owns the name there are channels through GitHub to deal with this if it were to come to that (which it usually doesn't).

mattfarina · 2018-01-17T19:37:39Z

@spiffxp and others... the document has had a bunch of updates including:

New title
Pointer for repo to the template project
Updated list of orgs with links
Removed repo guidance

spiffxp · 2018-01-17T22:40:22Z

/lgtm
/hold
holding for comment from other steering committee members

thockin · 2018-01-18T00:01:00Z

/lgtm

timothysc · 2018-01-18T02:11:02Z

org-owners-guide.md

+## Current Organizations In Use
+
+The following organizations are currently known to be part of the Kubernetes
+project:


The steering committee will be pushing out a doc soon regarding organizational structure which will likely cause the structure below to be reformed.

Does that need to block this PR? Can we update the doc after those changes come out?

I'd put a clause and change the content saying "this is all subject to change", but here is the current state, then lgtm from me.

Added that clause

timothysc

/lgtm

k8s-ci-robot · 2018-01-19T02:13:50Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mattfarina, spiffxp, thockin, timothysc

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:

~~OWNERS~~ [spiffxp,thockin]

You can indicate your approval by writing /approve in a comment
You can cancel your approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

spiffxp · 2018-01-19T17:25:03Z

/hold cancel

k8s-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 5, 2018

k8s-ci-robot requested review from calebamiles and cblecker January 5, 2018 22:05

k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Jan 5, 2018

k8s-ci-robot assigned spiffxp Jan 5, 2018

k8s-ci-robot added the committee/steering Denotes an issue or PR intended to be handled by the steering committee. label Jan 5, 2018

k8s-ci-robot assigned idvoretskyi Jan 5, 2018

mattfarina mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2018

Document List of Organizations #1407

Closed

bgrant0607 reviewed Jan 11, 2018

View reviewed changes

cblecker approved these changes Jan 11, 2018

View reviewed changes

spiffxp mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2018

Remove incubator content, touchup existing requirements kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project#14

Merged

spiffxp reviewed Jan 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

michelleN reviewed Jan 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

mattfarina force-pushed the repo-owners-guide branch from 09bd177 to 245fa5f Compare January 17, 2018 19:36

k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Jan 17, 2018

k8s-ci-robot assigned thockin Jan 18, 2018

timothysc reviewed Jan 18, 2018

View reviewed changes

Adding initial directions for kubernetes organization owners

8f29c50

mattfarina force-pushed the repo-owners-guide branch from 245fa5f to 8f29c50 Compare January 19, 2018 01:38

k8s-github-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 19, 2018

k8s-ci-robot assigned timothysc Jan 19, 2018

timothysc approved these changes Jan 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 19, 2018

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 19, 2018

k8s-ci-robot merged commit 9b5f429 into kubernetes:master Jan 19, 2018

mattfarina deleted the repo-owners-guide branch January 19, 2018 20:14

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Adding initial directions for kubernetes organization owners #1569

Adding initial directions for kubernetes organization owners #1569

mattfarina commented Jan 5, 2018

spiffxp commented Jan 5, 2018

idvoretskyi commented Jan 5, 2018

bgrant0607 Jan 11, 2018

bgrant0607 Jan 11, 2018

mattfarina Jan 12, 2018

spiffxp Jan 13, 2018

bgrant0607 Jan 13, 2018

spiffxp Jan 13, 2018

mattfarina Jan 16, 2018 •

edited

Loading

spiffxp Jan 16, 2018

mattfarina Jan 16, 2018

spiffxp Jan 17, 2018

michelleN Jan 17, 2018

bgrant0607 Jan 11, 2018

bgrant0607 Jan 11, 2018

spiffxp Jan 13, 2018

cblecker left a comment

spiffxp Jan 17, 2018

michelleN Jan 17, 2018

mattfarina Jan 17, 2018

mattfarina commented Jan 17, 2018

spiffxp commented Jan 17, 2018

thockin commented Jan 18, 2018

timothysc Jan 18, 2018

mattfarina Jan 18, 2018

timothysc Jan 18, 2018

mattfarina Jan 19, 2018

timothysc left a comment

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 19, 2018

spiffxp commented Jan 19, 2018

		to for CNCF compliance and for the guidelines of the community.

		## Organization Naming


		## Contributor License Agreement (CLA)

		All code contribute to the Kubernetes project needs to be done by those who are


		## Transferring Outside Code Into A Kubernetes Organization

		Due to licensing and CLA issues, prior to transferring software into a Kubernetes

Adding initial directions for kubernetes organization owners #1569

Adding initial directions for kubernetes organization owners #1569

Conversation

mattfarina commented Jan 5, 2018

spiffxp commented Jan 5, 2018

idvoretskyi commented Jan 5, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mattfarina Jan 16, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cblecker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mattfarina commented Jan 17, 2018

spiffxp commented Jan 17, 2018

thockin commented Jan 18, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

timothysc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 19, 2018

spiffxp commented Jan 19, 2018

mattfarina Jan 16, 2018 •

edited

Loading