 Hello there everybody started in just a minute. Let's see if anyone else is joining. Okay, we're going to go ahead and get started. Welcome everyone. This is the SIG contributor strategy meeting for the CNCF. We are as a CNCF committee we are subject to the CNCF code of conduct. So be nice. And, and also this meeting is being recorded for the CNCF archives so please be aware of that. And with that, let's go ahead and get started. Make sure that you put your name down in the minutes. Paste that again into the chat. We don't appear to have any guests from projects with issues or looking for guidance today. So we will go through the normal agenda of subcommittee stuff, etc. Unless somebody has something else urgent. If you have something not urgent just put it under other in the agenda. Okay. So maintain your circle. Apparently Paris can't make to the meeting today. She added some notes. February 28 is the next scheduled maintain your circle event. She needs to ask Celeste and Steven for structure I don't know who those are apparently the presenters, the, and she needs to send our notice about that. So anybody else know anything about what's going on with that. Okay. So. Oh, hey, now I can actually see everybody. The. Hey, Charles. Hey, April. April had a good time off. Oh, good. It was nice. It was inspired by Carolyn. So thank you Carolyn. Okay, governance. We're just getting started for the year. We have our usual sort of slate of content that we're still trying to produce for project governance, etc. The one sort of bit of news we have is the elections online elections application is almost complete. The project will belong to CNCF infra after that so not a CNC a project because it's not cloud native, but but one supported by CNCF staff and available CNCF and Linux Foundation projects. For those who weren't following around with it it's a preference election application that works entirely off of defined off. So that projects can have things like steering committee election and it's a useful replacement Linux Foundation is offering access to something through LFX but that thing is a proprietary elections application. That costs money every time you use it. And as a result would be more restricted for projects. Having a free and open source option is helpful. I don't know whether or not the CNCF will be offering instantiations of this because the project is just the code. It's not a running instance, particularly because you need a running instance of it for each project the way we set it up we decided trying to do multi tenant was going to be painful, and therefore we just didn't do it. So it's going to be up to the CNCF whether or not they launch instances of these for the projects yeah. What elections will be used for. So we just used it for example for the Kubernetes steering committee to select their general board representative. And the main goal in doing this project was to allow was to support the annual Kubernetes and open telemetry steering committee elections. So, so yeah those sorts of elections. I think it's isn't it like anybody that basically if you're doing elections that are based on eligibility defined via GitHub. It's just like your life saver. It doesn't write and it doesn't even necessarily need to be GitHub if you're willing to add another OF provider. True. Yeah, the only one we've included in the code is GitHub, but it's we're using the generic Python OF library so anything that that supports could potentially be a provider. So, yeah, and mostly this came out of my pain with civs. I've done a number of elections using civs and it was oh my god I am just never doing this again. So, email hell. Yes. So if someone wants to do an election, because you said it's not hosted, they'll need to send it up and run it for the duration of election somewhere. Yeah, and so what I'm hoping is, and one of the things we should discuss in the next governance meeting is once it's 100% finished. It's not quite yet. I mean, I would say the code will be done in around two weeks. And then we need to finish the documentation. I, the, that I'm once it's completely finished. I'm thinking that we discuss some governance that we send a request to the CNCF saying hey, it would be nice if you offered this to projects to spin it up. Because the project will be providing say a a Kubernetes suitable container image. But it won't be free because you need a database on the back end. Configured currently to use my SQL could be anything that SQL Alchemy supports the and, you know, and a cloud hosted database costs money so the So it'll be kind of we can send a recommendation that it'll be up to the CNCF staff to decide what they can reasonably support there. And part of it's going to be honestly based on demand, right. If I were Amy or you or whoever what I would probably do is see how many projects requested. Yeah, thanks. So, but yeah, you have to instantiate it and run it somehow. And we've been running in this instance for test purposes for the last three months. And I'm probably overpaying because I don't understand the Google cloud system very well. But I think it's costing about 90 bucks a month. Most mostly because the hosted database the Don do we have anything else for governance. We've really done anything else in a month. Everybody's been on holiday. Yeah. Oh, thanks. I got it kind of more purple over the holiday. Thanks. Okay, contributed growth Carolyn. Um, this is kind of our status from last week when we met. We are in the middle of interviewing projects we've done for so far that I'm aware of for contributor framework. Um, but I don't really know much more than I don't know. Charles, if you have more info on that, maybe. I'm sorry if you don't know. No, no, sorry. There's somebody is on our fire escape and it is. I was not told this was going to be happen so happening so I have no idea what you just said. Oh, I was just wondering if you if you had more information about the interviews that we're running right now for the contributor framework if you know Yeah, yeah. So Catherine I believe is done with the interviews I have reviewed her doc with my notes. So I know that she's looking for input from other folks as well. I think the doc is linked in the meeting notes. And I have going to set up a meeting with her to teach her how to make a pull request. So that's that's why it's not in GitHub yet but she's looking for reviews in Google Docs. I just updated it with the link to it. It's really good this whole bunch I haven't had a chance to read it yet. Yeah, she, she and I walked through it so it's it's looking good it's in shape I think it's got a lot of good feedback in there. Yeah, I think overall she's looking for information about whether it's too specific not specific enough, you know, looking for the right amount of prescriptiveness, I guess is the right word. Um, the other thing is the contributor ladder. I owe Karen Karen review and really just more content a little more. Can you link that again, because it's not a pull request so Oh, yeah, right. And while she's looking for that I'm just wanted to call out that Paris updated in notes that January 28 is the next maintainer circle not February 28. Today I play the role of Paris but then which happens a lot anyway. So I just added a link to the contributor ladder, we have a draft in our repository that Karen started it off. I think I think it needs just another round of like editing and a little bit of maybe cleaning up the text of it. But please take a look to what it looks like. It's better PR if you have more changes you'd like. We also discuss starting an onboarding guide, and also a reviewing guide, we're tracking this under our content issue. So I wasn't going to make extra ones for that I don't know how we're doing things Josh if you want individual ones for each piece of content. I, you know, I don't know whatever works for you the actually probably ones for each piece because we might say oh wait this one is not quite ready. And it's a lot more helpful to actually have a separate issue for that. Because otherwise you're combing through all of the comments to try to figure out which things were actually improving. Yeah, yeah, we've just been updating the app. But I can switch it out and split all those into issues. So that's, that's what contributor growth is kind of doing at the moment. Everyone has any questions always I can jump right to the website. Yeah, go ahead and jump to the website I'm just looking at this. So, I made a proof of concept for the website and open up a PR because I'd like to get it into our repo. So I don't have to keep merging in changes. What'll happen to the tiny amount of content that's currently in the contribute repo. And sorry, what. So there is a little bit of content as in basically two pages in the other repo. It's in the website. Have you seen it lately. Yeah, but I thought the website was drawing from that contribute repo currently. It is at the moment it's a, it's a my own personal fork. I don't feel like I have license to make changes to anything yet. If that's not true please tell me, because then I won't be maintaining forks and kind of doing weird things. Okay. I'm going to say I. You can verify this but as far as I know you have all of the necessary authorization. Okay, okay, cool as long as as long as the the existing content is still there in some form. It'll be an exact same spot those the extra files and data. Yeah. Yeah. So, okay. Cool. What I wanted to ask about is the current. And this is all in the issue of going to read through it. I made the minimum required changes to make pulling in the content from the contribute repo the existing one work. But to be honest right now it's made to be read from GitHub. And it isn't following any of the conventions of Hugo, which is how during the site. I'd like to change that so that people obviously added it on GitHub, but it's meant to be viewed on Hugo and it would just move a lot of hacks. Yep. Great. That'd be awesome. Yeah, I think it was good. I like that. I was just, you know, playing with it. It looks really good. I like it. I do have one correction that I'll send over for GRPC, the primary language. But other than that, everything was great. Yeah, if you need to change anything I suggest doing it against the, the real canonical repo on the main branch. Okay, so should I just wait until it's not a big deal so like I can just wait until everything is set up. I would just submit your PR. Let's get it merged. And then when I do a final merge and match up with everything that's in there. You know, it doesn't go for your change. My stuff is definitely out of date. I haven't done a merge in the past like two weeks. So when do you play? Sir Caroline, when do you plan to complete your job with with the website like to merge everything into into one single space? Um, so we saw that there's always going to be two repositories. There's our six repository and then there's this contribute repository. I haven't merged them together I didn't plan to. I wanted to get the POC that I have in the main branch so that it's not, I'm not carrying the burden of merging constantly. And then I'm making sure that anyone can make edits. So this isn't like a, you need to finish the editing experience. So I think I'm almost there and then the question would be what do we need to do to switch. And then Netlify is serving that URL. I'm not sure it's probably the direct. So, we have the contribute.cnc.io which is directly routed into the GitHub. I'm not sure how it is exactly set up. So this has been done by LFIT, I assume. So we'll have to submit the LFIT ticket to change that. Or you can, you can redirect directly. You can, you can submit your changes directly to the CNC of Contribute Triple and in this case, it should just work. So, when I submit the changes to both of our repo so that both means have all the website content in it. I'm just talking about that final redirect so it doesn't go to the root of the repository goes to this website on Netlify. Can I open a Service Desk ticket for that or? But just shoot me an email because we'll have to circulate on that internally. Or yeah, you can do a Service Desk ticket actually. Anyway, let's do the Service Desk ticket, the CNC Service Desk ticket and we'll figure out internally what to do here. That'd be awesome. Yeah, I will, I will do that then there's like a couple things just to make sure everyone knows how to contribute and then I'll submit those PRs. Perfect. Oh my gosh, I see cube conspring there. And I'm terrified. Okay, so wait, so the the actual the all of the markdown files and stuff, those are going to live in the Contribute repo or they're going to live in the SIG Contributor Strategy repo or where? Um, so what I'm taking advantage of the fact that Hugo can pull in content from multiple locations. Yeah, so the website, we have two links. They say I'm a maintainer, I'm a contributor. Okay, if you say I'm a maintainer, it's taking to a section of the website that's populated by our content in our SIG repo, and that'll keep going, you know, what I recommend we do is instead of having draft folders, we just mark it as draft and it won't display on the website, but it'll live in its final destination, you know, in GitHub, just fine. Which would be great. How do you mark something as draft. It's YAML metadata. Okay, in the header of the page. Yeah, you just basically say draft true and it won't, it won't render that page. You just mark it as a draft in GitHub though, right? Yeah, so I don't have like anything that could just like switch where it took to show you. So, like when you write a webpage for the website, at the very top, there's just a little bit of YAML and has a couple of fields like what's the title, things like that. And one of them that we can use is draft, and what that means is when we publish the website to production, that page won't be included. Gotcha. It'll still be in GitHub, which is great. We can also edit it and see it. But when someone goes to contribute, they won't see it. Got it. Yeah, and then we don't need to keep using that draft folder if we don't want to. If we can do that, it makes sense, because the other option obviously would be to have a draft branch. Yeah, I don't think we need to do that. Okay. But we can try it this way and, you know, if we need to change it, everything's changeable. And so as far as the, anything that's on the other link, anything about related to contributing, being a new contributor, things like that, it will show you content from the other website. Sorry, the other repository. And, you know, over time, we may want to, right now it's just two giant pages, to be honest, we may want to split that up because now that we have, you know, website format, we're not just using GitHub, I think we may be able to present it better. So it's not quite so overwhelming and scrolling. Okay. Well, this is awesome. So, you know, you'll work with you or to actually get this made live. And in the meantime, the rest of us should look at what other sort of content we can get online since we can just push it into our existing folders. Yeah. The, and, and we'll file some issues because I just realized I actually want to make a subheading under governance so the Okay. Cool. Great work. I'm getting very used to looking at Doxy sites lately. The, although admitted my other sites I'm using Doxy Jekyll so that I don't actually have to have a build step. It's Doxy Jekyll. It's a set of Jekyll themes that give you the same layout and functionality as Doxy. I didn't even know that existed. That's awesome. What you need to use it is that if you're using Hugo Doxy right, then your CI or on your desktop you need to go through a build step before publishing. And because Jekyll is run by GitHub itself, you don't, you can skip the build step. Yeah, well, Netlify runs Hugo as well. So, oh so Netlify is doing the build step for you. So, as an editor, you can change it in GitHub, you know, you can just like right click on a file say add it, you know, make one line change and you'll get the full build everything you don't need anything on your computer. Okay. The, yep. But they look the same. So. Okay. Awesome. So that's where we are on the website. Everybody should be contributing to that. And this now means that if you create a document in your folder, it needs to have a little bit of metadata at the top of it. And it really is a very little bit. Look at the existing pages. Okay, so let's move on to KubeCon Spring. We, there's a recommendation there that we should have some kind of a submit some kind of a contributor strategy session. It can be just kind of a tour of, you know, what we have to offer, etc. and what we're working on. Or, you know, do we have a particular topic we can focus on for this one. I'm wondering if we'd like to focus on some of the guides that we've finished creating. Yeah, yeah, like have a topic that's about, um, actually, I think Don submitted one. I saw your proposal, but stuff like that like some of our advisory guides would just make great talks standalone you know how do you do a contributing guide how do you welcome new contributors things like that. Yeah. I think the talk I submitted was about business risk, which governance is a big part of. Yeah. Okay. Well, I mean that would actually kind of have an argument. It wouldn't be a bad thing to have a session that sort of focuses on contributed growth. Because that's an area where we've had a lot of questions from projects and it would be a little different from the attempted session that we had in the fall. And I think would have a lot of interest again from, from the sort of target attendees for KubeCon spring. There's contributed growth is a big area do you have any thoughts on. I would be, it would be basically sort of an overview of how do I get contributors for my CNCF project. Okay, the new contributor pipeline. Yeah. Yeah, the that's just a thought right if you have something something else that you think would be bigger but but that is kind of the question we've been getting from projects. You know, how do how do I get contributors. I have this project. It's, you know, technically successful. But it's like our company and our company's ecosystem so how do I start getting public contributors is a big one. Yeah, I saw a lot of submissions actually related to that for Yeah, for KubeCon Europe. So, I think a lot of people are thinking about it. Yeah. Okay. I guess the question is, do you think any of those submissions pretty much cover that topic so that it doesn't make sense for us to do one. Okay, no I think they're coming from slightly different angles. So for example, if we covered the new contributor pipeline. I didn't see submissions related to that. You know, coming in for you can. Yeah, I think I think it's okay for you to talk about it in general just don't name anybody or gives the exact content of the submission. Um, yeah, so I think that like, that would be an area that no one's known really submitted anything on to say how do I bring people in, what are good practices what would a contributor ladder look like a contributing guy and any of those types of things. You know, people are focusing on different areas of contributor growth in their talks. I'm going to get an angry letter from all this money anymore but so I was going to watch this video and get me out of me. Okay, I think that's a good idea I would be I would be in favor of that and willing to help with it. Anyone else. Somebody who want to volunteer to lead the drafting process for the submission. Someone else really wants to do it then I want them to do it. And Harris and she's not here should I just volunteer her for that now she would kill me. I'm happy to help I don't know that I want. I don't know that I have the expertise to, you know, be the lead on the submission but I'm happy to help wherever I can. I'll maybe get a couple different ideas and what we need we can meet and kind of see which one seems. Yeah, we can just like flush it out and do a brainstorming yeah. Cool. The one other thing that we have an agenda, Paris put in if there's no comments or suggestions for graduated guidance and templates to see should begin their approval process. So, the. The next question is, what is that approval process and we're going to have to bug Matt and sod. Yeah, which I, she sent an email didn't she like recently to them. Yeah, she sent an email and I have the, I would really like as much as possible to not have a full to see vote every time we want to publish a document. The, I think, I think maybe I should comment on that proposal and suggest that hey, if it's a non controversial topic either Matt or sad, or their replacements from the TOC should be able to just approve it. Can we just lazy consensus. We just put out there and if no one says anything after a week, it goes. I would like to have somebody who's sitting on the TOC approve it just so that we don't end up in the situation where we publish something and then somebody in the TOC takes exception to it. Yeah. Slightly consensus you just need one person. But yeah, I think it can be just one person right. Yeah, the. So, like I wonder, like, what's the process for approvals. If there's a like change in the TOC repo, like, surely they don't all have to approve. No, so like, can't we just copy that same process for our stuff. The. Yeah, I mean, honestly, the the actual physical promotion gets done by the CNCF staff. Do it based on judgment, I guess, is whether or not the TOC approved something. So, you know, and pretty much everything going to the TOC repo does get at least brought up at a TOC meeting. And I'm just saying, you know, hey, if I publish a guide on. If we publish, for example, a new contributor ladder template that should not need to be approved by the entire TOC. Right, right. You know, it's just not some things right like if we post guidance on the multi organization requirement, etc. That probably does need to be approved by the default to simply because they've already argued about. But for most of our documents, they're just, it's just missing documentation. It's not controversial. So the, I mean, I will say she's not here. I was a little unhappy that Paris pushed that email to the TOC without having discussed it with anybody in this meeting. So we'll have to backpedal now. Well, I mean, are we, the content is still correct. But she she sent an email to the TOC that include a proposal that the full TOC would vote on every piece of content. Oh, I yeah, I missed that part. I just got the email that Matt and saw needed to give their okay. Yeah. So, yeah, that was in there and I was like, oh, so the, I think we might want to modify that proposal. I guess ultimately we need the TOC to tell us what they want. I mean, if we're supposed to be a subgroup of their efforts, then they should tell us how they want to receive and approve. Okay. I actually need to jump off because I need, I'm being paged in the SCD community meeting. This, this, I will not end if people still have stuff to discuss. But, but I need to jump off. I mean, I think that was the end of the agenda right so. Yeah. Awesome. Thanks for attending everybody. We'll follow up in Slack and GitHub. Bye bye.