Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:

+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

Paris,

On the call today you suggested pairing down the scope of the SIG because there is so much proposed. It occured to me that contributing to the CNCF can mean a lot of things. To large areas are contributions to SIGs and to projects. In your opinion, should the SIG initially be limited to one area of focus (and if so which one) or to focus on both?

For those not familiar... CNCF SIGs are a little different from Kubernetes SIGs.  Kubernetes SIGs own and are responsible for code within Kubernetes. CNCF SIGs are an extension of the TOC:

The CNCF TOC Special Interest Groups scale contributions by the CNCF technical and user community, while retaining integrity and increasing quality in support of our mission.

Each project has their own governance model and contribution process. Where Kubernetes SIGs have a solid line or ownership to Kubernetes code, CNCF TOC SIGs have a dotted line relationship to CNCF Projects who own the code and governance. The dotted line relationship means that projects do work with and connect to a SIG but the ownership model is different.

Regards,

Matt

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:

Thanks TOC and community members for your time today on the call and support via mailing list. 

Next steps: smooth out the charter and have interested folks step forward to help bootstrap. after, TOC vote/review later on. 

doodle poll[1] for those who are interested. looking forward to this!

paris 

[1] https://www.doodle.com/poll/p85raxnd35cm7rtv

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ricardo Aravena <raravena80@...> wrote:

+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:

+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.
  

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

Good summary Matt!

Paris, just wanted to say thanks for your presentation today. 

A

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, 18:17 Matt Farina, <matt@...> wrote:

Paris,

On the call today you suggested pairing down the scope of the SIG because there is so much proposed. It occured to me that contributing to the CNCF can mean a lot of things. To large areas are contributions to SIGs and to projects. In your opinion, should the SIG initially be limited to one area of focus (and if so which one) or to focus on both?

For those not familiar... CNCF SIGs are a little different from Kubernetes SIGs.  Kubernetes SIGs own and are responsible for code within Kubernetes. CNCF SIGs are an extension of the TOC:

The CNCF TOC Special Interest Groups scale contributions by the CNCF technical and user community, while retaining integrity and increasing quality in support of our mission.

Each project has their own governance model and contribution process. Where Kubernetes SIGs have a solid line or ownership to Kubernetes code, CNCF TOC SIGs have a dotted line relationship to CNCF Projects who own the code and governance. The dotted line relationship means that projects do work with and connect to a SIG but the ownership model is different.

Regards,

Matt

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:

Thanks TOC and community members for your time today on the call and support via mailing list. 

Next steps: smooth out the charter and have interested folks step forward to help bootstrap. after, TOC vote/review later on. 

doodle poll[1] for those who are interested. looking forward to this!

paris 

[1] https://www.doodle.com/poll/p85raxnd35cm7rtv

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ricardo Aravena <raravena80@...> wrote:

+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:

+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.
  

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

Great presentation today - where can I sign up? We need this SIG ASAP. 

+1 NB

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:19 AM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:

Good summary Matt!

Paris, just wanted to say thanks for your presentation today. 

A

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, 18:17 Matt Farina, <matt@...> wrote:

Paris,

On the call today you suggested pairing down the scope of the SIG because there is so much proposed. It occured to me that contributing to the CNCF can mean a lot of things. To large areas are contributions to SIGs and to projects. In your opinion, should the SIG initially be limited to one area of focus (and if so which one) or to focus on both?

For those not familiar... CNCF SIGs are a little different from Kubernetes SIGs.  Kubernetes SIGs own and are responsible for code within Kubernetes. CNCF SIGs are an extension of the TOC:

The CNCF TOC Special Interest Groups scale contributions by the CNCF technical and user community, while retaining integrity and increasing quality in support of our mission.

Each project has their own governance model and contribution process. Where Kubernetes SIGs have a solid line or ownership to Kubernetes code, CNCF TOC SIGs have a dotted line relationship to CNCF Projects who own the code and governance. The dotted line relationship means that projects do work with and connect to a SIG but the ownership model is different.

Regards,

Matt

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:

Thanks TOC and community members for your time today on the call and support via mailing list. 

Next steps: smooth out the charter and have interested folks step forward to help bootstrap. after, TOC vote/review later on. 

doodle poll[1] for those who are interested. looking forward to this!

paris 

[1] https://www.doodle.com/poll/p85raxnd35cm7rtv

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ricardo Aravena <raravena80@...> wrote:

+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:

+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.
  

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

--

Kris Nova

Chief Open Source Advocate

85 2nd Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

nova@...

+1 NB

 

Thanks

 

--- 

Nicola Marco Decandia Desotech S.r.l. +39.0803105224 | +39.3404191066 | n.decandia@... https://www.desotech.it Altamura - Roma - Milano

 

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

+1 NB this is the most important SIG in Kubernetes. I know this isn't the right thread for my followup, but since chairs are confirmed by the TOC I immediately +1 Paris as a co-chair, if she is nominated, as a chair for this SIG. In short, she kicks the llama's ass (I haven't asked the WinAMP llama how they feel about this) and not only is the best person for this role, will also find fantastic successors to this role. Thanks, Paris, for driving this.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:26 PM Kris Nova <kris.nova@...> wrote:

Great presentation today - where can I sign up? We need this SIG ASAP. 

+1 NB

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:19 AM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:

Good summary Matt!

Paris, just wanted to say thanks for your presentation today. 

A

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, 18:17 Matt Farina, <matt@...> wrote:

Paris,

On the call today you suggested pairing down the scope of the SIG because there is so much proposed. It occured to me that contributing to the CNCF can mean a lot of things. To large areas are contributions to SIGs and to projects. In your opinion, should the SIG initially be limited to one area of focus (and if so which one) or to focus on both?

For those not familiar... CNCF SIGs are a little different from Kubernetes SIGs.  Kubernetes SIGs own and are responsible for code within Kubernetes. CNCF SIGs are an extension of the TOC:

The CNCF TOC Special Interest Groups scale contributions by the CNCF technical and user community, while retaining integrity and increasing quality in support of our mission.

Each project has their own governance model and contribution process. Where Kubernetes SIGs have a solid line or ownership to Kubernetes code, CNCF TOC SIGs have a dotted line relationship to CNCF Projects who own the code and governance. The dotted line relationship means that projects do work with and connect to a SIG but the ownership model is different.

Regards,

Matt

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:

Thanks TOC and community members for your time today on the call and support via mailing list. 

Next steps: smooth out the charter and have interested folks step forward to help bootstrap. after, TOC vote/review later on. 

doodle poll[1] for those who are interested. looking forward to this!

paris 

[1] https://www.doodle.com/poll/p85raxnd35cm7rtv

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ricardo Aravena <raravena80@...> wrote:

+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:

+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.
  

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

--

Kris Nova

Chief Open Source Advocate

85 2nd Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

nova@...

Huge +1 to the proposal and echoing Gerred's sentiment for Paris as a Chair if/when this forms.

SIG ContribEx is _one of_ the most important SIGs in Kubernetes and Paris has been an absolute force there.

We'd be lucky to have her affecting change on the CNCF SIG level! :)

-- Stephen

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 14:45 Gerred Dillon <hello@...> wrote:

+1 NB this is the most important SIG in Kubernetes. I know this isn't the right thread for my followup, but since chairs are confirmed by the TOC I immediately +1 Paris as a co-chair, if she is nominated, as a chair for this SIG. In short, she kicks the llama's ass (I haven't asked the WinAMP llama how they feel about this) and not only is the best person for this role, will also find fantastic successors to this role. Thanks, Paris, for driving this.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:26 PM Kris Nova <kris.nova@...> wrote:

Great presentation today - where can I sign up? We need this SIG ASAP. 

+1 NB

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:19 AM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:

Good summary Matt!

Paris, just wanted to say thanks for your presentation today. 

A

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, 18:17 Matt Farina, <matt@...> wrote:

Paris,

On the call today you suggested pairing down the scope of the SIG because there is so much proposed. It occured to me that contributing to the CNCF can mean a lot of things. To large areas are contributions to SIGs and to projects. In your opinion, should the SIG initially be limited to one area of focus (and if so which one) or to focus on both?

For those not familiar... CNCF SIGs are a little different from Kubernetes SIGs.  Kubernetes SIGs own and are responsible for code within Kubernetes. CNCF SIGs are an extension of the TOC:

The CNCF TOC Special Interest Groups scale contributions by the CNCF technical and user community, while retaining integrity and increasing quality in support of our mission.

Each project has their own governance model and contribution process. Where Kubernetes SIGs have a solid line or ownership to Kubernetes code, CNCF TOC SIGs have a dotted line relationship to CNCF Projects who own the code and governance. The dotted line relationship means that projects do work with and connect to a SIG but the ownership model is different.

Regards,

Matt

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:

Thanks TOC and community members for your time today on the call and support via mailing list. 

Next steps: smooth out the charter and have interested folks step forward to help bootstrap. after, TOC vote/review later on. 

doodle poll[1] for those who are interested. looking forward to this!

paris 

[1] https://www.doodle.com/poll/p85raxnd35cm7rtv

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ricardo Aravena <raravena80@...> wrote:

+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:

+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:

• This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  
• Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.
  

paris

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UYIp55jsEn7hSGHOh4sXXx_VnqPL0E0upsWCUZB5Tn8/edit?usp=sharing 

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

--

Paris Pittman Kubernetes Community Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud 345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105

--

Kris Nova

Chief Open Source Advocate

85 2nd Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

nova@...

+1 NB. I look forward to seeing the evolution of CNCF with this SIG in place.

On 1/23/20, 8:11 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Richard Hartmann" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of richih@...> wrote:

    +1 NB

    On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 1:43 AM Matt Klein <mattklein123@...> wrote:

    > Big +1 from me. Very excited to see this SIG form as I think this is an area that many projects struggle with. The projects that don't struggle with this have some very overworked maintainers. ;)

    *cough* and *cough*






----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
This e-mail may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, do not duplicate or redistribute it by any means. Please delete it and any attachments and notify the sender that you have received it in error.