Re: Istio Steering Committee


Josh Berkus
 

On 8/25/20 12:20 PM, Alexis Richardson wrote:
During the summer break it occurred to me that many of the advantages i
could envisage in adding SCs would be achieved if the notion of
Maintainer was broadened to include non coding people.  But you still
get benefit from org level direction over the top.
And for large projects like Helm, an SC has these benefits. Just like
Kubernetes. But in smaller projects, where you're looking at a couple
dozen regular contributors period, there's not a lot o benefit --
generally the exact same people are on the SC as are in the other
groups. Unless you add someone from outside the project, in which case
you have different problems.

For a small project, I'd recommend (were I advising them) trying to
broaden their maintainers group to include non-code maintainers (like
docs and advocacy), which is usually a better approach when dealing with
a small pool.

Of course, it's really up to what the project wants.

Fwiw, i don't believe in imposing or forcing things either.  Apologies
if I have given that impression.
We have to recognize that if we make an SC an alternative for other
governance requirements, that will result in an SC being imposed on a
few projects where the contributors otherwise don't want one.

BTW, in this thread I am speaking as a single member of SIG-Contributor
Strategy, and not for the whole committee. Other members of the SIG may
well disagree with me. I am also not speaking for Red Hat.

--
--
Josh Berkus
Kubernetes Community
Red Hat OSPO

Join cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io to automatically receive all group messages.