 Hi there. Oh, so, oh, Josh as well. Hey, Josh. Hey there. How are you. What extremely frustrated with having to be my own AV tech. Oh, still issues with no. The camera or, I mean, issues with zoom recording. Caroline, I just, I'm so sad to say that updating and then hard restarting. Got rid of the convert button. Right. But you still can't see the videos until you close the meeting. And then you have to wait for them to do their thing. But that would have worked a lot better for us than the cloud recording, I think. You know, it basically made local work the same way as clouded, but there was no way for us to like see the video. And know how well it went until you killed the meeting. Oh, for the coupon document, you were just, yeah, yeah. Well, because one of our thoughts was to record it in multiple segments. Because the. Because that way, if we have to re-record something, we're only re-recording, you know, three minutes instead of re-recording the whole thing. But. Using a video conferencing platform is not necessarily great for that. Because. You know, we wanted to record one segment and then check it out. And then see if we needed to adjust some things and do the next thing it turns out. Yeah. So. I can't. I actually necessarily do that. And then we discovered other issues with local recording on zoom. Period. Yeah. I think it was not really done to record. Video sessions, right? So it's not. Yeah. Yeah. But the issue, particularly with some, some updates of zoom where. If you stop the recording and you started over again. It tells you that it started, but it's not actually saving anything. Yeah. Yeah. So. Apparently. On Mac. If you update to the very latest release. That's fixed. According to my Twitter commenters. But on Linux, you actually want to roll back to a previous release to not have that problem. We were, you know what though, we, we rallied. And then I have a good feeling about what we recorded. Okay. And I'm hoping we don't need to re-record. Or anything. Me too. We'll see. I'm always wary of upgrading right before trying to do something. Cause usually it breaks everything, but I don't know. Well, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that once you see it, you're going to say like, Oh, we totally nailed it. Yeah. Or at least, or if anything needs to be fixed, it's just a matter of trimming a few seconds. Yeah. So which I can do in post, but, but it's starting to, it's giving you the picture of what doing a presentation is like these days, because like, you know, we spent three hours recording and out of that, only 45 minutes was spent actually recording. And it'll probably be four hours by the time I'm done editing it. So it'll be four hours to record a session, most of which is spent doing AV. Yeah. Happy Tuesday, everyone. Yep. Today is March 30th, 2021. And this is the contributed growth working group. Aren't I good at changing subjects. Um, so what we have on agenda today, I think we've kind of already covered the cube contact. Actually, it's, it's been rough, but we have a, a recording that's slowly processing and we'll, we'll see how it looks before Josh has to then splice and edit it together again. I just want to give an update on the website. It did rebase all the website stuff. And then updated it with everyone's changes. So I'm just waiting for Josh for you to. Yeah, I know, I know. I just, I have not been able to actually look at it. Because well, you know what I've been doing. I know what you've been doing. We've been on Zoom for like five hours today. Yeah. So that's kind of where, oh, you can. Good to see you. I'm glad you can make it. So that's the, that's the website, but our goal is to definitely have the website in some form live by the cube console. And the main thing I'm going to be really viewing by the way is rearranging all of our content in the main repo. So that it's in a folder structure that actually works for the website. So after I do that, I'm going to ping everybody and slack on the mailing list because. You want to make sure to. Actually, I think I'm going to do it before I merge it because you will not want to have. Like Paris is branches open with uncommitted changes. Yeah, I'd like to get those merged like Paris is PR in particular. You know, I'm pretty sure. That's like one of the move files. And I'm not sure how easy it'll be to do the merge conflict and where as on my end, I can just kind of copy and paste whole thing over. Well, so do we want to, do we want to merge? Is Paris's thing ready to merge? Paris. I'm working through comments right now. I mean, after that, it can merge. Yeah, this, this is the one I'm thinking of. Yeah. Oh, okay. Cause it's also the maintainer circle thing. But that's just a file. Yeah. And I did. The maintainers read me too. Read me. It's not impacted by my changes. I did not move the read me's. Yeah, this won't, this won't be impacted at all. This one's fine. It's just the other one. This one. No pressure, but we're definitely going to want to merge this first so that we don't hand Paris a really ugly merge. Instead, I can do it. Okay. I will have this done in 20 minutes. If somebody can give me a LGTM on it. I have a rubber stamp with your name on it. Yes. All right. Hold on. I'm going to. Potentially mute you too. And someone has get these done. So hold on. Oh, um, this. This PR needs cleanup. Unfortunately. You accidentally brought in an unrelated change into it. Yeah. I don't know what unrelated change. There's one, a one line edit to the maintainer circle file. It's unhooked. Oh, it is. Okay. Yeah. Okay. I was still seeing it, but if you fixed it, you fixed it. Yeah, it's unhooked. It's all there's only two, two files now. Yeah. Yeah. And I'm cleaning it up right now with all the comments. Two files. Can confirm. Yeah. Just take notes here real quick. Okay. I think that's all we have to say about the website. The contribution ladder. We have a PR, I think open. Yup. It's on the different. It's on the templates, isn't it? Yeah, because it's a template. Yeah. So that's one of the things that's going to change that I actually mentioned here, which is the contributor ladder file that's in the main repo is going to disappear. If we merge the one into templates. It could be a file in the main repo, but the file in the main repo should explain the concept of the contributor ladder. Rather than being an example of one. Yeah. The. So. Yeah, so we'll have an advisory guide for the, the ladder. And then the template would just, you know, choose your own adventure for the tax. Yeah. Yeah, so this is the. Sorry. Go for it. Oh, okay. So this is the, this is the new version of the template, but I've made actually some substantial changes. Since it went on to hack MD. And we've all been a little asynchronous here. So I wanted to make sure. Doing this meeting. I wanted to be sure that regardless of whatever nits we have here. That. We grew the direction that I've taken it in. Because I haven't got a lot of people. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Here. Why don't you share? Okay. And now we'll have our next excitement of the day and find out when my sharing is working. Oh. It's always an adventure. Okay. So let's see if anything happens there. Can you see my desktop? No. I'm here. I'll share my screen again. You see a big black screen. Yeah. Okay. Sorry about that. Okay. Okay. So. Yeah. I'm here. Wait, let me just see the file. Okay. Great. Do you want the review? Yeah, because we've got some comments in there unless we can see them. Yeah. No, we can't see them. Hey everyone. So read this. Yeah. Everything there is we've seen it before. I sort of. Cleaned it up. D duplicated some names. Added notes at the beginning of every. I'm going to give you a little bit of an explanation about what the role is for and who would include it in their contributor ladder. The. Where. I've made some substantial changes. So one of the, the last thing we talked about. In a meeting that I was in was having the separate sort of maintainer expansion pack file. And we started working on that. And Karen. Put up a hack and be filed for that. And then we totally bogged down because. There's a little bit of stuff there. But. None of us were able to come up with. Fully realized descriptions. For. Fully realized templates for these additional maintainer roles. And I think part of that is like when I looked at it, like when the first thing to start it was. Oh, hey, I'll give documentation and maintainer as an example. So Kubernetes has a good example of that, right? Because we have our separate documentation roles. And so we can have the documentation maintainer. Look at Kubernetes documentation. And it is so Kubernetes project specific. That it would not make for a good template and that kept happening. With the other sort of specific maintainer roles that I tried to. Finish up. So my suggestion, at least for. This version of the template. That. We not have those. And instead we go back to just having a listing. Of potential other maintainer roles. With descriptions of what those generally would be. Which is kind of where we started, but. Except with more roles now. Karen thoughts. Sorry, I'm still reading through. Okay. Some I really didn't know. Yeah. So we've added a branch. To the templates. Repository called drafts. And that's going to be kind of like a staging place where we can merge in things like this. Before we're totally ready to put it in front of the TOC and be like, this is the template for X, Y or Z. So as you're looking for content in that repo, you can do a lot of things. And then you can do a lot of things like. You can do some things like a version of any template. And then there's drafts where you'll find things like this. Contributor ladder template. Do are we trying to get consensus on this during this meeting or. Well, we're not quite ready to merge. So one of the things also about that is. I added in the additional maintainer roles. And I thought, okay, well, we're not going to be able to provide a template for these, at least provide an example for them. So that would be an example link for each of them. Yeah. So that would be something we should at least take a stab at. Annoyingly, I have a good example for sub project maintainer, but it's for a project that also hasn't merged its contributor ladder yet. So. Why can't you take the project owner from Kubernetes? So when it takes a project. Yeah. Yeah. Documentation maintainer. I was trying to think of a project that actually has. Localization maintainers. That actually documents its roles. Because I know projects that have de facto localization maintainers, whether or not they have the document. The question entirely. The question. Sorry. Going back to how you like kind of broke down the example maintainers. Can you reiterate why they're currently comments? Yeah. I mean, they're not flushed out. Those are not fleshed out. They're not templates that somebody can just fill in values and use them. I guess. So my concern there is more that if it's not immediate on. Like unless they click through to the comments, then they might not think about it at all. As in like, we wouldn't be encouraging them to think about the different roles. So I guess my only thing would be like, you know, I don't know if I'm going to be able to do that, but I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to figure it out that we don't have examples right now. Are you talking about viewing it this way versus in the. Yeah, exactly. Every single one of the templates says at the top that you need to be viewing it in bra. But. That's what you mean that they like, that's like when they use it, right? Like you think of someone comes to this page and they're thinking about the stuff that they'll necessarily go through and it's like, you know, I mean, if they don't, there's a lot of stuff missing. Cause there's a lot of stuff in comments. Yeah. And all the templates. We have quite 50% comments. Yeah. And the problem is that we put in the additional maintainer roles. Not in, not as a comment. We're back to the problem that we had with the very first version of this, which is. We have more roles that we say people, most people are not going to use than we have roles that. We're going to use and it kind of bulks out in the original file. And that was how we got to having a second file in the first place. Fair enough. So. I mean, I'm not saying we might eventually want our sort of maintainer expansion pack eventually. I just like to have it not hold up. Publishing the basic version. Yeah. Yeah. Cause honestly, I've already taken our draft and used it to build a contributor ladder for a project because I couldn't wait. I'd also like to see if there was something that didn't make the translation into the comments or even, even the comments, I'd still love to see that material. Be in the. The advisory guide. Cause like, so there's what goes on our website. Once we have it that walks you through the idea of a ladder and what should go in it. Right. So that's the template. And then there's this template here. I want to make sure that I mean, we put a ton of work into identifying different ways to be a maintainer and have noncom contributions. I want to make sure that we don't, we don't lose that. It's going to go into the website then. So nothing will be hidden behind. To do this or mark down comments at that point. It'll be visible for everyone on the site. There any more comments or things we want to talk about with the ladder right now. Yeah. I think we're, I think we're, I think we're, I think we're a plan for getting this merged quickly. Cause we are referencing it in the talk and we're going to be referencing and linking to hopefully. A real template. Not a real template. A merged template. Yeah. The only thing I know that needs to be done is getting those example links. Or deleting the blank link that with, can't find a good example for something. The. And, and then whatever edits people have. I'm not sure there's going to be edits. Okay. If we're going to have it. Like the examples. Is there a place. Did you pull them out into like separate pages already? Or like. Do we have how come to. The examples would be a link to some page and some real project somewhere. Okay. Okay. So a project has. A documentation maintainer role. We would link to where they put that. Yeah. They may not have a ladder, but they still may describe the role. Ideally it's a ladder. So do you just need help populating the links right now? Is there a place we can drop them? Yeah. Well, I attached the PR. Okay. Okay. For the contributor framework. I think we, we have one zero one and two merged in. Yeah. Yeah. So if I go in here. Sit in drafts. Yeah. So you have zero one. Oh, I guess. Wait, where'd to go? Was it always called just pure? Yeah, I don't know. It should be a two before it. I don't know. Okay. Don't worry about that. Don't change it because in the website, it's named differently. So I wouldn't, I wouldn't worry about it because the file. The file got renamed. Okay. To look right as a URL. Do we have the next PR for that? Yeah. I, I, I know that Josh had them all. Scott had them all already in his thing. He was going to. So I just pinged them actually. And said that we're ready for the next one. Yeah. Should you poke them all through at the same time? When it's better one by one. They'd get shorter, by the way. You know, if they're shorter, I think it's fine to group in more. Yeah. The first one was the beast and then it gets. Yeah. Caroline will give you very timely reviews on all of these. Is there anything else that people will want to talk about today or. Yeah, I think that's kind of the issue. Right. There are a lot of people with a lot of things and a lot of things to review. So. Yeah. But we'll see when it's, once it's there, right? I know, Carol and UC. See these, but. Cause I know that there is a process. Once it's done. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, like once that is kind of. All submitted. And then it's kind of the question. How do we. Get. People to review and then, because I think that's kind of the question. Yeah. Cause I know that there is a process once they're all there. Before it gets like shown to someone from the talk, there's like a whole process. So. But I guess we'll see it once they're. Life. And I know it's a lot to ask people to review everything. Cause I'm not the only one. I think more things to review. There's Karen's Josh. There's Paris. Everyone is asking review. Yeah. I think once we have. Parts, I forget how many six. We can submit that to our liaison. Are we going to have them in one of our meetings soon? Our TFC liaison. We can invite them. Okay. I was, I wanted to see, could we go through the framework live since we have some time. That would actually like, I feel like speed up. My review by a hundred. Yeah. Yeah. Can you maybe share and walk through it? Yeah. Yeah, let me find it first. All good. Take your time. Hey, you brought the first one, but not the second one. Yeah. So the first one. Let me just hear. Yeah. So that's the second one that is there now. Yeah. So. Do you want to just read it or should I just walk through it or. Let's walk through it. Okay. So. I have to remember now too. Yeah. Basically here we're kind of trying to see like, how do you successfully kind of. Manage people through the flow and make sure they're not. Demotivated through the process. And so here basically you talk about like how the process is, how the flow is. And I think we got rid of the things here, but it's like also like kind of make notes on your CRM tool so that you can, you know, like your remember things and valuable information associated with one person. And. I hear one someone submitted like, right? That's like a really good point. Or you have to make sure that the person doesn't get an engage. So try to suggest something because that could be like a moment where you lose the person again. So it's kind of like, okay, when someone submit something, try to see if they're interested in doing more. One of the things that came really crystallized was. You know, the expectations part, like how that you have to be like super. Transparent regarding a response time, what you need, right? Like the better, the more time you put into explaining exactly what you need, which may sometimes feel like. You don't have the time to do it, but if you do it, people will create much better PRs, right? Because they know exactly, they cannot read your mind, of course. But if you are the better results, there will be being really clear with documentation. And then whenever you have an idea that, that has to do with a PR that was submitted, kind of capture that and kind of tell that to that person. So maybe you're kind of planting a seed for future. Contributions. Then it's a little bit about tools. Like what is that, that, that you have to really, like really give people what they need. And so you have like docs, PR checks, templates, lots of different things. You could do videos, bots. Yeah, but like also we have to be sure you're able to maintain that. So be, be, be conscious of what you, like what you can maintain and, but give them as well, like enough tools. So people know exactly what to do. Then the automation part and automate as much as possible. We skip this part for now because it's too technical. Yeah, well, first. I almost think that should go first. I've been telling most people lately, like you should think automation first in terms of how to contribute or experience. Because I'm nervous. I'm nervous that if we give folks a lot of this, like it just will stress them out too. A lot of what do you mean? As far as like going in depth with it's scroll up. Can you scroll up just really quick? Sorry. Cause like right here we're going into in depth on like what they should put on PRs and stuff like that. So when I talk to maintainers about this stuff, they usually just get really stressed out because there's, they say like it's things that they know they need to do, but they can't do it. So then when I say, well, that's what automation can help you out with. And like it opens up a much more positive. Outlook, like, and especially when I demo things like the, that like the Kubernetes bots does. With like displaying documentation and stuff like that. So I think that's where if like, we should put just a note at the top that a lot of this, a lot of this we really believe should be automated. Yeah, I think that's part is more referring to expectations and like communication. So I think that's not the part that can be automated, right? Like, okay, if, if you know that it takes you three weeks to review a merge of PR, you know, let them know. You can let them know automated too. What, yeah. Yeah, that's why you can automate all of those expectations. Oh, I wasn't like, I don't think it's meant to put it like somewhere manually or say it is like put it somewhere in the docs or yeah, but like you have to have like somewhere a place where people know. Like in our contributing guide or template, we put this in here average response time. I think that like, I think that would be helpful to say like where you're putting these expectations because right now I'm just reading it as a maintainer and you're telling me that I should do all of these things. And I already don't have time to do these things. Well, I think. Like all this along in the contributing guide, the entire manage expectations section. Yeah. And I think there's like, there's a lot of this that's also just duplicate with the other guidelines that we have. So I guess. Well, if you have it something, we should just like link to it, right? Like, for instance, it's something like, I don't talk a lot about the letter. I kind of mention it and then I link to the letter, right? Like, so that's kind of the idea. And I think I have your recruitment playbook as well somewhere, you know, like, so it's like, oh, if you want to recruit people, like mention it and then like, so I think if we have stuff already, we should link to that and not, but so this is basically kind of like more of an overview. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I don't know that we have like for this manage expectations thing. I don't know that's not material that we really have anywhere else. That I know. I guess I'm like in agreement with that. I think it should go on the contributor. I don't know if it's templates. That's right. Well, I don't hear everything in the templates. We've tried in it. It really doesn't work. We'll live in. We've been talking about having a torry with it. I've, we've been suggesting how, or. Our plan has been to have a page on the website or something like, like this. That then links to the template and explains how to use it. Okay. I think we just need to figure out where. Those templates are going because I got from right now, I'm looking at the PR as well. From right here, I don't necessarily see a lot of places where people can go for additional help outside of just guidance. Like for instance, I meant like I don't see that necessarily like where you should put this. I think it's a good start. I think it's a good start. I think it's a good start. I worry that we have a lot of duplicate content that we're going to, that we're going to be calling people to. And that we're also giving guidance and areas where. Is more adding more humans when we don't necessarily want to add more humans in a lot of these situations. That's just my take. So manage expectations. Okay. So what I'm going to do is that. I mean, to be honest, that used to be in the contributing guide and it looks like. We got lost in the review process. It's a giant comment. Yeah. This is, this is why I'm really unhappy at the moment with like shoving stuff in the comments. Instead of having. Like said, the website and then the template, you can kind of walk you through how to fill it out. I don't know. Finding the comments is not easy. Reading the markdown. Yeah. Is awkward. Yeah. Yeah. What we should have is have this kind of a guide. Link it to the templates. Have. Maybe have comments in the template that are very much shorter versions of this. Like, I mean, once we actually have, once actually write a guide for the contributor ladder, for example. Hi. Yeah. I may actually take, you know, also submit a PR to take some material out of the comments in the current template because it has a lot of comments. Yeah. Is this the template? Is this what goes along with this template? Like should just, should this right here, the growth framework being linking to the template and vice versa? Like they should just both be linking back and forth to each other. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But you've got stubbed out here developing a contributor ladder and using the contributor ladder, right? So that's why that material is going to go. Yeah. And then if they come to the template first, it should link them deep right into where they need to go. To work at the template. Yeah. Exactly. I guess I just don't, I guess for, for right now, from a visual perspective, that's why I wasn't seen. It's just. I guess. All text, which. I'm trying to put myself into a already busy maintainers. Mind of how do I make this better? And then it's just text with not much like. Links to act like forkable things and stuff like that. And not enough emphasis on automation and. Like automated things that people have created. That help this, like, I know Porter has and stuff like that. So. That's why I think our emphasis should really be with a lot of contributor growth things in general, just from a vision perspective. Well, I think. This section is not really saying. How you should do this, right? It's more like, these are the things that you need to do, right? You have. You should be clear about response time. You should have all the information of like, the information about how the flow and what the action items are. So I know as a contributor know what. What is expected. What is expected regarding code and documentation quality. And like. We could make a little note at the end and saying a lot of these things can be automated and then added in the automates, because this is just like, these are the things that. You know, should be given like, and then whether you do it. Automate, if you can, whether you automate it or do it. Individually is on your own, but you have to kind of be really clear about these things. Yeah, we cool if after we merge, it would be cool if like we could go in and make sure every one of these has an example. And something forkable. Something what? Forcible. Meaning like so for average, like for. Expectation about code and documentation quality. Like we can give an example of. You know, like PR review guidelines on. An automated bot that, that comes on and, and gives you that documentation. So like that's what I think that would be really good to go with the guidance is like just firm examples and. You know, some of the stuff that we think would go well instead of just like high level guidance. Well, I think a way of seeing this as well is like, this is of course very high level, right? And we have some assets already where we can link through, but like once we're done with that and the letter and so on, like that would be like, okay, like if this is kind of the things that you need, like, that would be like a good way to identify the next, you know, a job is like, okay, what, what would be useful? Yeah, because you have this high level thing that gives you like, kind of like a. Idea what to do and then it would be great as you said, like to have something that goes more into detail, right? You don't want to be too detailed in this thing, but like you want to link to things. When people want to have more information about, about these specific areas. For sure. So maybe it's a good idea, like it's a good source of. You know, the coding documentation policy, like, that's a, if you say like, oh, that's super important point that could be like the next, you know, project. One thing Paris pointed out that really resonated with me is that we need to be careful that our job here isn't to output. More. Yeah, text. Totally to give things that. You know, you know, you can get in a very short amount of time, one actionable thing. Because this is like my bread and butter. But when you see a document that's, I don't know how many pages long and I'm not nagging on your document at all. All of this stuff is the things we say verbally all the time. But I don't see anyone reading this end to end. You know what I mean? Yeah. So all the people that we want to read this wouldn't read it. Yeah. Yeah. How do we juggle wanting to give people a little bite size. Do this and you'll make your life easier versus providing conditionally if they want to dig into it, all the background and reasoning, you know, behind it. Yeah, I think this is, this doc is like the Bible for anybody that does community management for open source. This is this is the like this is the Bible for community man. This is the Bible for our group. Like it's like the meta. It's like the meta Bible for our group. Right. 90% of open source doesn't have community. Right. But what you're describing is actually a classic. One of the classic problems in writing documentation. Which is. There's. Three basic types of documentation. There's narrative documentation. There's reference documentation and there's solutions. Documentation. Right. Narrative documentation says. Explain this whole concept to me. What we have here is narrative documentation. Right. If you want to understand, if you need to understand the big picture, you need the narrative documentation. And then reference documentation is. I want X, right? I want to understand the sub projects. You know, explain the, the sub projects governance structure to me. Right. That's reference documentation. I want to understand one thing that I've already defined. And then there's solutions documentation. Which is like that only turned 90 degrees, which says, Hey, I have this problem. How do I fix it? And it's always a problem for documentation because you really need all three kinds of documentation for the recipients. Right. Because people come at it with all three angles. But you can't. Structure the same set of text to fulfill all three roles. Yeah. And even if you have the staff to produce all three keeping them in sync is very, very difficult. The. So. You know, for, for what it's worth, I mean, so we approach this and we say, Hey, look, this is a narrative documentation. And we want to work on ways to enable it. To make it useful as other kinds of documentation. We kind of already have the reference documentation in terms of the templates. We just need to cross-link the two. Yeah. And the solutions documentation is really what's missing. Yep. The. And that we're going to have to create from scratch additionally after we merge this. But, but I mean, this is to solve the problem, which I have run into on multiple CNCF projects of, Hey, here's a CNCF project and sponsored by a company. This is that company's first significant public open source project. They don't know how to do open source at all. And I found that often they are actually willing to assign them to open source. So, I mean, I think that this guide is amazing for that role that is. Yeah. Perfect. I wonder if we should even put like a little thing at the top Catherine that says like, even like maybe an intended audience or. Like who should read this or. I mean, obviously I want, obviously I want everybody to read it, but it's kind of a. Just like a, like a little flag, I guess, right? For, for people who are reading. Oh, cool. We already have one. Oh, I don't know. It's such a. Yep. Yep. Wait, where are all the PRs for this, by the way. In draft. Well. The. No, they're. They're PRs. They're not PRs. They're not PRs. They're not PRs. They're not PRs. Well, the. No, they're PRs. No, they're merged. We don't have all of the PRs yet. Okay. So the first two. Oh, it's in the drafts folder. Got it. Got it. Okay. I love the motivating users to contribute section. That was the first PR that I saw that I liked. Like that. Like, honestly, and I love that you led with that one. I love more. I love that. Yeah, like, I love that we led with that because, um, I feel like that's the number one question I always get from other maintainers is. How do we get my users to contribute? So I really appreciate that you led with that one. You know, But it's the first step, right? Yeah. I mean, Every most contributors are going to be users of one kind or another. Either they are personally users, or they work for a company that's a corporate user. Suggestion. Right now, part of what makes us feel. Daunting to imagine someone reading it is because it is one document, but that's not how it's going to be presented on the website. And the website. These are individual pages. And I think a good way to tie together. Our solution. Focused and reference documentation right now. We just have reference and it's, it's a template. Is maybe to have a call to action or like, what the heck am I supposed to do with this information that you just dumped on me, either at the beginning or the end of the page. So that. You can immediately jump from this to how do I make it go? How do I make it go fast? You know, I think because we're, we're, I feel like we've given a lot of unactionable feedback to Catherine so far. It's all good feedback, but like, if I had to say what we could do is one, we'll remember that this is me page by page and two. How do we link is maybe a next steps at the end of each page. So actually, honestly, like we can treat it like an academic. You can treat it like a textbook. And just start inserting things in there of. Takeaways from this section. Yeah. You know, do X, Y and Z. And any of us can add those. Yeah. So we. Oh, sorry, sorry. I was going to say we can get a lot of this merged in and then have separate tasks and follow-ups because like I said, I'm going to leave my follow-ups right here. Let's do that with this too. Where any one of us can go, I know what one of the next steps is for a successful PR workflow, or to be honest, the entire thing about automation. Could be, you know, more links and like, here's a quick win, here's a quick win and just list five quick wins at the end of these sections. And all of us can help make that happen without having to hold up. I really don't want to hold up Catherine's work here because it is so horrible and I want people to read it as soon as possible. So how many total PRs is this Catherine? So it's five, but like, yeah. Two, one and two are in and then this is fairly short. So three more. Yeah. But we probably, this one is one, three, four is, so it gets really short. Yeah. Yeah. So the longest are the ones that are already in here. I went, I actually have like a high level kind of question for the crew. And this, because this goes back to like this whole idea of like, we're not idea, these like open questions that I have. Yeah. I mean, I think we need to get it with CN, not just the CNCF community at large is do all CNCF projects have to be contributor communities? Does that. Yeah. Go ahead, Josh. To date. Yes. So that means like, if that's the case, I think we need to make contributor ladder required for graduation. Yeah. And we have a lot of the contributor ladder. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think with Dawn, the current draft mission statement, et cetera. These are all things that we do want to propose as graduation requirements because. Projects should have them. This is why I'm like, I'm all about this taxonomy life. All about this like contributor community taxonomy life. Anyway, cause well, so reason why that, that just like triggered in my head is this, you know, I'm sorry, the section of the doc that Catherine has up right now. Cause it's pretty much we're telling people to do this. And so it's like. What if their crew is like a plug in. And it's 10 people forever. So are we saying that that, that size of a, of a project is required to have a contributor ladder to graduate. Which is all the more reason to give people a template that they can just plug some numbers into the. Well, I guess I just fundamentally disagree with that all projects need contributor ladders. I agree that you need a contributor ladder. A community. Right. Like I agree. That's what I agree. But in some cases, the contributor ladders only going to have two rungs on. Like for a smaller community, that's, that's the answer. It's not that you don't have one. It's that you have a much shorter one. Because for example, every, every project is going to have maintainers. And if you don't have to find criteria for how you become a maintainer, then it's hard to demonstrate that your project is open to new maintainers. Every CNC a project should be open to new contributors or sorry, maintainers. Yes or no. Yes. Yeah, no. And the answer is yes, it has to be part of the graduation criteria. Because otherwise you just have people floating around. Never really articulating how to become a maintainer. And then you just invited weird, clickish things where no one ever effectively can become one. So they need to write it up front. It may be terribly hard or terribly uninteresting or for, you know, one sentence. I think we need to force people to use their words and say what it really takes. Agreed. Now, but on. What if they say, well, why can't I just do this in my governance someday? Cause I can reason why I'm asking these very specific questions, maintainers will take our advice and just fork it. Right. So I'm saying, so I guess I'm saying here is like, do they really need a separate document as long as it's spelled out somewhere? I would say they just not need to be a separate document. Having a separate document provides a little bit of additional clarity, but I would not put that into the requirement. Agreed. A lot of people who want to do more than just, we have maintainer press these buttons, you are maintainer and it's two lines are going to want to say a lot more than really fits or belongs in the governing doc, at which point it makes sense to have the separate template, which is why we went that way. Yeah. But you can do like, you can do like Kubernetes. If you have a community, if you have something where you do want to actively encourage participants of all different roles, there's way too much to put in governing that has nothing to do with it. Right. I guess I'm just more, I guess I just look out for like the 80% of projects that are like under 10 people. Yeah. And, and, you know, if I was writing a requirement about this, the requirement would be something like. The project must have a written, must have written documentation on how it contributed or advances from their initial contribution all the way to maintain. Fair, fair. Yeah. The, because will we like the quote unquote ladder structure? I wouldn't make that required if somebody else can come up with something, something that looks different, but nevertheless documents the process. That's fine. As far as our templates go, I think we want to template what we want to model. And it's not. Stuffing it into the governance stack. Yeah. Might be cool to like say, say that in here next iteration, not now. Good. I wouldn't have to discuss that for a while. Thank you for. Discussing with me. That was cool. Let's just merge and go. Yeah, Kevin. We said a bunch. Do you have what you need to make your next PRs? And you know what we're going to be asking for in those PRs in order to get a merged. Well, so as I said, Scott has them out there. So I think he can add me to it or something. And I can add a little bit to it, but I think we wanted to have like a next. Well, we had like two in the next steps, takeaways and five quick wins, which we have to decide what we kind of like the five quick wins as well. I thought it was kind of like a, it sounds cool. Okay. These are all the things, but these are the five things. That will really like, if you want to get going quickly. So. I don't think those should hold up your PRs. I think we can add those incrementally. To these as drafts. Yeah. Disagree. So do you want me to do any changes. To this right now. Well, here we kind of set like. That it is a little bit of a duplicate. I'm still not seeing where, what content that's duplicating. And. Yeah, I don't think it's duplicate content. I think that we would like to link to the template and tell people this is where you need to. Verbalize everything we just discussed. I don't necessarily think it's duplicate. I think it's. We've, it's just going to be tough for us to maintain the same text in multiple files. So that's driving by duplicate. So we don't have this text anywhere. Not the, not this text in particular, but some of the other texts that I saw. Um, like new contributor workshops, we're going to go in on the, the playground for that. Um, and there's like other things that we can put in these areas. I don't know. So I guess that's. I guess my thing is just maintenance of these. Um, that's why I'm just a big fan of. Like one paragraph and then links, you know, because then it's just like canonical sources and not necessarily like stuff that we have to go back on and, and check. Yeah. So when I knew about it. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. This is what I did here, right? Cause I knew you were working on the recruitment. Recruiting playbook. So that's what I created here. Cause I thought like that. Fits in really well. So it's like, Hey. And here are a few examples and it's like, okay, here's the full thing. Right. So totally agree. If we have this. I just didn't know, like, don't know where that would be, but I totally agree. We don't want to be. Like really high level and it's like, okay, here are the things you have to think about. And then it's like, boom, boom, boom. Here are the details. Like if you just want to have an overview, just have a read. But if you want to dive deeper here are the, the links. And so you can really kind of learn. More. So I think that that's basically the, the. Kind of idea that I had. Um, if there is any duplicate content here or something, it's because I wasn't aware, right? I did this with your playbook. I did it with a letter. So I didn't go into the letter in more detail. That's what the actual file is, right? So, um, Um, so at some point, maybe, um, what we can do as we create. New assets that go deeper, we can decrease, you know, like we have like three paragraphs talking about the topic. Uh, if we create a specific asset for that, we can just, you know, make one paragraph and link to that. So I think. That would be a good approach. It's like, as long as we don't have it, it's like high overview. And then we kind of start trimming it as we create more assets and then link to that. I love that. But yeah, we should like in the future, if we can trim it, definitely. Yeah. I'm also seeing going in reverse with some things like taking some of those long comments out of some of the templates. Um, and simply linking back to, to the appropriate page in this guide. Yeah. I think we're having very, uh, predictable growing pains because we're trying to like pull content out of thin air and we don't have it all at once. So it's going to get shuffled around as we evolve our documentation, organizational structure. Yeah. I don't like that. We're going to have to start doing a lot more big bang. Yeah. Yeah. You know, organizational design and be like, what are all the types of information we want? Where is it going to go? So that we actually have a place to put it from day zero. Yeah. Well, I think it's a matter like as the content grows, it's kind of keeping in mind what we have and then adjust it. Right. And then, or should it link? What should, what can be reduced? But it's a good problem to have. Like once you, that means that you're creating more and more assets right now. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So that's just getting started, I guess. Okay. So for now, I just, or. Scott. We'll submit the. Missing PRs. And then we add those. Quick wins or next steps or take away. So whatever. Or did you want me to do something else? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I think that those are great things for everyone in this call. And, you know, in the wider community. To add as they identify them. I don't want to hold it up because we haven't figured out what the right key takeaways are though, for each section. Yeah. And I think that can be added as we go too. And. Paris, just to your point, I think the reason why we wanted to, like. We. Yeah. So that's when I, when I, when Scott read through it, the truth is. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And this kind of goes very much into the GitHub detail. So what we were thinking is it would be good to have an additional page that goes more into. Cause it's too specific to get up. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We have a section on the website. Just for GitHub. So we have a home for that, that content. And we have that when we have the website merged. I'll help. Get that into. It's on page. Okay, cool. But yeah, that was, that was basically the reason. Why we decided to just skip it for version two or an additional page because it was like high level, high level, high level. And then suddenly you're talking about one. Which was a little odd because it's like, why are you diving deep into GitHub? And then, but that was just because of the interviews go that way. And I. Wanted to capture everything. That's why I think like a good highly, yeah, I think that automate as much as you can. Might even want to go all the way up to, I would personally take it all the way up to the top. And like, because that's a good high level of why you should automate. And the fact that it like. Just adding more things. And adding more process to a maintainer doesn't mean. The things are going to necessarily get better. It means things are going to increase in volume, which is burnout. So that's why I'm in favor of making sure that this is really highlighted. I actually, there's even talks that people have given that I can link. After we merge, I can submit a PR. For this section that talks about. You know, automating contributor experience and stuff like that. Yeah, this one is March already. So. Sorry. I can move that up. Oh, sorry. Okay. I was just going to say, I can make a PR then that's fine. And yeah, maybe I'm going to read through it and maybe just. When we're talking about all these things to keep in mind, just always kind of say like something, don't worry. These things can also be automated. It's just like, in theory, you have to be good transparent. But you can also do, you can also leverage technology to make it, you know, Yeah. Easier on you. I've just seen folks literally just like shut down when I have told them, oh, like, you know, you just need to do X, Y, Z thing. And it's just like the shutdown happens. Well, it is a lot, right? Like, yeah, it is. So, and I can't imagine that's a little frustrating because it's. If you don't provide the feedback and you, if you don't put in the time, you're discouraging people and you may lose people. So it's like, it's kind of like. That's 22 of maintenance. We have the website. I think it's going to give us an opportunity to make this information feel much less like a wall of text because we can take so many of these things and bring them out into their own separate pages too so that we can link to it. And this really can be high level with lots of links to other pages that go into the nitty gritty details. Yeah. Yeah, but I'm excited that you like the idea to have this like as a starting point and then kind of have all the things because I think that's like. I mean, that's how like some people would start with that and some people will go right into the specifics depending where you're in. But if you're really starting at the very beginning and you need to know, you know, like as Josh said, that meta overview, right, like when you go here and. Yeah. Okay, so. It's the end of the meeting. Someone else needs his conference room. Yeah, I'll just look out for your PRs. And stuff merged and then when we identify things, we'll just make follow up issues so that if we need to do things like move stuff up or make an entire section about the GitHub repo versus org level or whatever, we don't lose track of those. Awesome. Merge fast, make extra issues. Awesome. Thanks everyone. Bye bye. Awesome contributor management guide here. That's awesome. Thanks, Catherine. Thank you. Bye.