community icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
community copied to clipboard

should TechLeads be mandatory (vs not combo with Chair)

Open parispittman opened this issue 4 years ago • 4 comments

Broken down from issue #5855

Current state/knowns:

  • 1 Chair is required for a SIG per sig-governance.md
  • only two roles that are identified in sig-governance.md is TL and Chair
  • 11 SIGs have explicit entries for TLs in sigs.yaml (combo=chair and TL):
    • Scale
    • Storage
    • Windows
    • Cluster life
    • ContribEx
    • Docs
    • Instrumentation
    • Release
    • ApiM - 1 chair, 1 TL, 1 combo
    • Auth - 2 chairs, 2 TLs, 1 combo
    • Cli - 2 chairs, 1 TL, 1 combo

Why:

  • There is a lot of work just for a chair to do "Chairship is not about being an expert on the technical details. It's about organizing the SIG." (current chair)
  • operational and community work gets neglected (example: #4289) which helps build sustainabilty and meet governance
  • Helps separate technical decisions from running a meeting (moderation vs ownership/technical decision maker)
  • helps with contributor ladder
  • people conflate chair and tech lead
  • [will add more]

Notes

  • will collect feedback and discussion here

parispittman avatar Jul 14 '21 17:07 parispittman

/assign

mrbobbytables avatar Aug 02 '21 16:08 mrbobbytables

Problems I have heard -> my recommended solution

  • Lack of documentation -> document better / in better places
  • Lack of succession planning -> have deputy chairs / TLs / subproject owners
  • Lack of recognition for accomplishments -> OWNERs files, subproject owners, deputy roles
  • Lack of formal roles within a SIG to reward/encourage contributors -> OWNERs files, subproject owners, deputy roles

I have not heard of any problem for which "require every SIG to have TLs" sounds like it could be a solution.

lavalamp avatar Aug 10 '21 20:08 lavalamp

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

k8s-triage-robot avatar Nov 08 '21 21:11 k8s-triage-robot

/lifecycle frozen

mrbobbytables avatar Nov 09 '21 02:11 mrbobbytables

TLs were split in this PR: https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/7160

Going to go ahead and close :)

/close

mrbobbytables avatar May 08 '23 15:05 mrbobbytables

@mrbobbytables: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

TLs were split in this PR: https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/7160

Going to go ahead and close :)

/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.

k8s-ci-robot avatar May 08 '23 15:05 k8s-ci-robot