ii/cncf-okrs

ii CNCF OKRS

cncf-okrs's Issues

Engage Jorge w/ Ali : Definition

Unknown who the stakeholders.... Evan has been a tech mentor, but is not a stakeholder
Enganging with Ali Ok & Jorge Castro
To define the body of work

🟢 :istio: O4 Identify Key Stakeholders with Jorge

• Meet one Stephen Landlow?
• Identify rhythm connection

🟢 :k8s: O3 - community ownership of apisnoop website

ii maintains everything for APISnoop.cncf.io
Ideally this happens within the Kubernetes Community / #sig-k8s-infra

Key Results:

• KR1 - apisnoop website s donated to #sig-k8s-infra
• KR2 - the workflow happens completely within the k8s community repositories

In order to have community ownership of the apisnoop website

As a #sig-k8s-infra maintainer
I want the apisnoop website to be fully accessible and maintainable by the community

As K8s community member
I want understand how the apisnoop website is deployed and contribute to it

Given a request to change the apisnoop website
When I create a PR to change the logic
Then the workflow happens completely within the k8s community repositories

Steps for this include (all of these can become tickets):

• Pare down the APISnoop side to essentials (removing historical org files and experiments)
• Ensure all documentation, including scripts, are up to date (or removed) (e.g. steps for setting this up with Kind)
• Ensure snoopdb can work with latest version of Postgres/Debian/Python
• Fix issue with updating the helm chart upon a new release

🟢 :cilium: O1 - easily spin up local development environment

• KR1 :: team can use your org doc to initialize work on cilium
  • look at development guide
  • spend some time with full time cilium folks and see what they use
  • document your approach via an org file

:k8s-infra: 04 - Document and present the method for GCP/AWS spend and asking for credits:

Caleb Woodbine #sig-k8s-infra -> https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CCK68P2Q2/p1706473322825959

Probably something like an org file that has steps, then eventually automate and populate something similar to what we dump into the channel.

K8s Infra Cost:

Data up to Week 4 - (21st - 27th January 2024)

• GCP spend:
  • Last week’s average daily spend on GCP $4,670.51
  • YTD: $140,564.86
  • Days remaining: 329 days
  • Remaining spend for 2024 based on this week’s avg. daily use: $1.56M
  • With the current GCP burn rate we would reach around $1.71M by Week 52.
  • This week’s daily average over one year (thinking about 2025): $1,705,902.73
• AWS spend:
  • Last week’s average daily spend on AWS $4,350.63
  • YTD: $154,184.23
  • Remaining spend for 2024 based on this week’s avg. daily use: $1.46M
  • With the current AWS burn rate we would reach $1.62M by Week 52.
• AWS Cost is 93.15%of GCP cost.
  • This week’s daily average over one year (thinking about 2025): $1,589,068.65
• AWS credit
  • $29,659.69 remaining – needs to be refilled asap 🙏

🟢 :k8s: O2 - community ownership of the Kubernetes Conformance Bot

ii folks the only people maintaining the k8s-conformance-bot, this needs to change. It will require buy in from #sig-k8s-infra

Key Results:

• KR1 - k8s-conformance-bot is donated to #sig-k8s-infra
• KR2 - the workflow happens completely within the k8s community repositories

In order to have community ownership of the Kubernetes Conformance Verification Bot
As a #sig-k8s-infra maintainer
I want the k8s-conformance-bot to be fully accessible and maintainable by the community

As a vendor
I want have easy to understand feedback if my submission is incorrect

As Taylor Wagoner
I want to easy interactions with the cncf/k8s-conformance submissions

Given a request to change the k8s-conformance-bot code
When I create a PR to change the logic
Then the workflow happens completely within the k8s community repositories

🟢 :cilium: Work with Jorge to Identify Stakeholders

• Not much there yet, but here its the placeholder :: cilium/cilium#29676
• Meet with Liz Rice + Jorge

🟢 :k8s: O4 - community ownership of Kubernetes Conformance release-informing-job

ii maintains everything for kubernetes release-informing-job
Ideally this happens within the Kubernetes Community / #sig-k8s-infra

Key Results:

• KR1 - release-informing-job is donated to #sig-k8s-infra
• KR2 - the workflow for changes happens completely within the k8s community repositories

In order to have community ownership of the release-informing-job

As a #sig-k8s-infra maintainer
I want the release-informing-job to be fully accessible and maintainable by the community

As K8s community member
I want understand how the release-informing-job is deployed and contribute to it

Given a request to change the release-informing-job
When I create a PR to change the logic
Then the workflow happens completely within the k8s community repositories