Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Change WGs to always be part of a TAG #868

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from
Closed

Change WGs to always be part of a TAG #868

Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
ff53d3b
Change WGs to always be part of a TAG
RichiH Jul 5, 2022
c66a215
Update workinggroups/README.md
RichiH Jul 6, 2022
6db5568
Update workinggroups/README.md
RichiH Jul 6, 2022
6f171dc
Update workinggroups/README.md
RichiH Jul 6, 2022
c8af8d6
Update workinggroups/README.md
RichiH Jul 6, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
22 changes: 15 additions & 7 deletions workinggroups/README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2,19 +2,27 @@

## Introduction

The purpose of working groups are to study and report on a particular question and make recommendations based on its findings. The end result of a working group may be a new project proposal, landscape, whitepaper or even a report detailing their findings. The intention of working groups is not to host a full project or specification. Working Groups can be formed at any time but must be sponsored by a TOC member and voted with a super majority vote by the CNCF TOC. The TOC can also shut down a working group with a super majority vote.
CNCF Working Groups (WGs) serve several purposes, for example to study and report on a particular question, to make recommendations based on their findings, or to complete a specific work package. The intention of WGs is _not_ to host a full project or specification. The work result of a WG may include a new project proposal, landscape, whitepaper report detailing their findings, or similar.

## Process
WGs must be created under the umbrella of a [CNCF Technical Advisory Group](https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/main/tags) (TAG), and sponsored by a CNCF TOC member. In case of disagreement within TOC, a supermajority vote may be called
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can a WG be created under the umbrella of multiple TAGs?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@nikhita I don't see why not, i also don't believe we should prevent a TAG's WG from being joint with another foundation. However there must be a very clearly defined governance of which entity is the "home" for the WG to resolve issues as well as define CoCC and other governance, license, and process escalation related items.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think in the past we have addressed the overlaps but identifying "Related Work Areas" and "Other groups that the WG interacts with". There will always be overlap, I believe it should be fine as long as the community has clarity as to what that is.


WGs can be shut down when the working group and TAG, with concurrence of the TOC sponsor, determines that they have reached their stated goals, by consensus within their umbrella TAG, or by a supermajority vote within the TOC.
RichiH marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

If you would like to submit a working group proposal, please submit a pull request to the working groups folder. As an example, you can see the other working group proposals here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/main/workinggroups
## Process

You will also have to present to the CNCF TOC and wider community before your WG proposal will be voted upon by the TOC and community. You can request a presentation by filing an issue here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues
If you would like to submit a WG proposal, please get in contact with suitable umbrella TAGs. The TAG will follow their existing working group processes or engage with their TOC liasons to create the WG should no process exist.
Copy link
Member

@nikhita nikhita Jul 11, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How would the relationship between a WG and the umbrella TAG(s) look like after WG creation but before WG disbandment?

How do the umbrella TAG(s) and the TOC sponsor ensure that the WG's mission is still aligned with its current state?
Suggestion - can we have WG representative(s) provide updates to their umbrella TAG(s) with some regularity?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like the suggestion on the update.


At a minimum, please include this information:
All TAG and working group processes regarding the governance, details, and logistics of the working group should include, at a minimum, the following information within their repos:

* Umbrella TAG & TOC liason
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: some places call this TOC liason and some call this TOC sponsor

* Links supporting information
* Goals
* Non-goals
* Mailing list information
* Mailing list / Slack information
* The location of meetings / agenda / notes
* Initial interested parties to show that there are multiple people across multiple orgs interested
* The chair(s) and TOC sponsor being explicitly listed so they are discoverable

## Current Working Groups

* TAG 123
* WG abc
Comment on lines +30 to +31
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This needs review/discussion, in particular on the proposed structure of listing WGs.

In case it's helpful, here's how Kubernetes lists down the Working Group to Stackholder SIGs mapping (especially given that one WG can map to more than one SIG) - https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/sig-list.md#working-groups

Copy link
Contributor

@halcyondude halcyondude Aug 18, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I really like listing stakeholders explicitly, both for its implication, "there are likely multiple stakeholder SIG's" and because it makes clear how the WG views its scope. Were we using full RACI one might suggest that were we to adopt this, TAG co-chairs should be included on PRs as a RACI "I" (informed).