Re: Istio Steering Committee
alexis richardson
It isn't but it has aspects we can learn from (good and bad) as do other projects (eg apache kafka to name one). This thread is specifically about steering committees, and what they can help with especially governance over direction. And avoiding open core feature withholding. Istio just launched a Steering Committee and that's why it is relevant. On Tue, 25 Aug 2020, 20:00 Kris Nova, <kris.nova@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
Kris Nova <kris.nova@...>
Excuse my ignorance here - but I thought Istio wasn't a CNCF project? Is there an official statement anywhere on where Istio landed? I am confused why I am seeing Istio threads like this if it's not a CNCF project? Or maybe it is? I honestly have no idea. On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:52 AM Josh Berkus <jberkus@...> wrote: On 8/25/20 1:42 AM, alexis richardson wrote: --
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
alexis richardson
Josh, feel free to highlight the negative aspects of Istio's history and governance on another thread. I may well join you. But please let's also give them credit for moving forward with improvements. As i said in the email you quoted, their SC illustrates some of the positives. I never said it is a panacea! On Tue, 25 Aug 2020, 19:52 Josh Berkus, <jberkus@...> wrote: On 8/25/20 1:42 AM, alexis richardson wrote: |
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
Josh Berkus
On 8/25/20 1:42 AM, alexis richardson wrote:
The Istio SC is a serious political problem, and the project has ongoing governance issues. Why would we want to emulate this with CNCF projects? An SC can be useful to a project that is large enough to warrant it, but it isn't a cure for projects with problematic governance. A project with broken governance will just end up with a broken SC. -- -- Josh Berkus Kubernetes Community Red Hat OSPO |
|
Re: [VOTE] Rook Graduation
Alena Prokharchyk
+1 binding
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-alena.
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
I am glad to see the discussion started. I've done a lot of governance work on various projects and am happy to help in any way I can. On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:08 AM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
alexis richardson
Good points Matt. Helm is well run and provides a useful model of one successful pattern. I don't think there is one true governance rule for who is on the SC. IMHO it is critical to include non code maintainers, focus on people who have a real stake in success of projects and community, and avoid creating bureaucracy. Asking maintainers "how could an SC help?" is a good starting point in regard to the latter point. On Tue, 25 Aug 2020, 16:45 Matt Farina, <matt@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
Matt Farina
The Helm project has a similar model in its governance. There is a separation between Org Maintainers and Project Maintainers. The Org Maintainers are responsible for the project but not the technical decisions. The Project Maintainers own the code. The Helm Org Maintainers have restrictions that no one company/organization can have a majority of the members. That means you'll have at least 3 organizations represented. Currently, there are 7 companies represented. One of the things that catches my attention about the Istio model is a matter of who decides which vendors to include. In the case of Istio it's Google. Who would even make these types of decisions for CNCF projects and have them work well for the people who maintain the code of those projects? On Tue, Aug 25, 2020, at 11:11 AM, Jimmy Song wrote:
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
Jimmy Song <jimmysong@...>
I think it's good for both vendors and end users.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
alexis richardson
Good comments Joe. I also don't adore every aspect of the Istio
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
model. eg I agree that "credit for contributions accrue to companies, not individuals" isn't optimal. But I still like what they are trying to do overall. On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 3:05 PM Joe Beda <jbeda@...> wrote:
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
Joe Beda <jbeda@...>
It is great to see a model that limits the influence of a single vendor. The explicit split between coding and non-coding contributions is.. interesting.
One big difference worth calling out is the fact that the Istio model looks to have all credit for contributions accrue to companies, not individuals. This means that the community is defined by the vendors, not the contributors. If someone leaves a job they, by definition, will have to give up their position on the SC (if I’m reading it correctly).
Looking at similar projects and different models (k8s) this will probably lead to a different quality of community vs. those that put people and project above vendors (“Community over product or company” is a k8s value).
Joe
From:
cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> Hi TOC community
I saw this news and wanted to highlight it. With kubecon behind us and apparently summer too, perhaps we can revisit the Steering Committee thread.
https://twitter.com/DanCiruli/status/1297945844767834112?s=09
Istio is highlighting some benefits of an SC model
1. Applies across whole 'broad' project not just repo level 2. Encourages diversity via non coding SC members, eg as Dan says you can also write .md files 3. Focus on overall direction on behalf of end users and community (avoiding the open core problems we see in other cases)
I think we should arrange for a TOC session to discuss SCs.
Alexis
|
|
Re: Istio Steering Committee
Quinton Hoole <quinton@...>
Seems like a very good approach to me. Q On Tue, Aug 25, 2020, 01:43 alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
|
|
Istio Steering Committee
alexis richardson
Hi TOC community I saw this news and wanted to highlight it. With kubecon behind us and apparently summer too, perhaps we can revisit the Steering Committee thread. Istio is highlighting some benefits of an SC model 1. Applies across whole 'broad' project not just repo level 2. Encourages diversity via non coding SC members, eg as Dan says you can also write .md files 3. Focus on overall direction on behalf of end users and community (avoiding the open core problems we see in other cases) I think we should arrange for a TOC session to discuss SCs. Alexis |
|
Re: [VOTE] TiKV Graduation
Li, Xiang
+1 binding
|
|
Re: [VOTE] TiKV Graduation
GolfenGuo
+1 NB
Thanks -- 郭峰 Golfen Guo Shanghai DaoCloud Network Technology Co,. Ltd #Your Cloud Native Application Delivered!#
发件人:
<cncf-toc@...>
代表 "Alena Prokharchyk via lists.cncf.io" <aprokharchyk=apple.com@...>
+1 binding.
-alena.
本邮件及附件含 DaoCloud 保密信息,仅限发送给上面地址中列出的个人或群组,禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用本邮件中的信息。若误收本邮件,请务必通知发送人并直接删去,不得使用、传播或复制本邮件。 |
|
Re: [VOTE] TiKV Graduation
Saad Ali
+1 binding
|
|
Re: [VOTE] TiKV Graduation
Alena Prokharchyk
+1 binding.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-alena.
|
|
Re: [VOTE] TiKV Graduation
Michelle Noorali <michelle.noorali@...>
+1 binding
|
|
OpenTelemetry 2020 Annual Review
Constance Caramanolis <ccaramanolis@...>
Hello TOC,
OpenTelemetry’s annual review can be found here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/515
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thank you, Constance |
|
[RESULT] Cortex approved for incubation
Amye Scavarda Perrin
Cortex has been approved for incubation.(https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/315) 8/11 Katie Gamanji: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5035 Xiang Li: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5052 Sheng Liang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5054 Justin Cormack: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5057 Alena Prokharchyk: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5069 Brendan Burns https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5167 Liz Rice: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5171 Michelle Noorali: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5173 +1 NB Ken Owens: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5036 Richard Hartmann: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5037 Matt Young: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5038 Kiran Mova: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5039 Ken Haines: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5047 Vishal Raj: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5048 Vineeth Reddy: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5049 Ricardo P Katz: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5051 Bartłomiej Płotka: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5055 Martin Schneppenheim: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5056 Peter Stibrany: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5058 Lee Calcote: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5064 Tom Wilkie: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5065 King Chung Huang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5066 Marco Pracucci: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5071 Alexis Richardson: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5074 Ganesh Vernekar: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5080 Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager | amye@... |
|