@@ -26,21 +26,36 @@ ensuring Kubernetes is stable and reliable.
26
26
(e.g. test frameworks) to unblock further steps
27
27
- Initiate and drive cross-SIG reliability improvements
28
28
29
+ For all of the above, we will focus on core Kubernetes components and addons.
30
+ Other SIG subprojects/components (e.g. SIG Scheduling descheduler) are out of
31
+ scope.
32
+
29
33
### Out of scope
30
34
31
- - Designing and executing improvements clearly falling into individual SIG
35
+ - Designing and executing on improvements clearly falling into individual SIG
32
36
responsibilities.
33
37
34
38
## Special Powers
35
39
36
- The Reliability WG has a power to block feature-oriented contributions from
37
- any SIG if requested reliability-related improvements are not being addressed.
38
- Before it can be exercised, sig-arch must approve the criteria suggested by
39
- this working group.
40
+ The Reliability WG will create a proposal that will allow blocking
41
+ feature-oriented contributions from any SIG if requested reliability-related
42
+ improvements are not being addressed. The exact criteria will have to be
43
+ approved by SIG Architecture, SIG Release, SIG Testing and automatically
44
+ enforced.
45
+
46
+ The exact scope of blocking hasn't yet been decided. There are at least two
47
+ high-level options: blocking PRs and blocking graduation of features.
48
+ Conformance vs everything enabled by default has to be explicitly defined).
49
+ As a result, the mechanics of blocking hasn't been decided as they will
50
+ heavily depend on the exact scope. As mentioned above, all of those will have
51
+ to be explicitly approved by SIGs mentioned above.
52
+
53
+ The blocking criteria (once approved) will be passed to SIG Architecture
54
+ Production Readiness subproject or SIG Architecture generally for reassignment
55
+ at the lead's discretion.
40
56
41
- Given WGs are by-definition temporary, on WG Reliability retirement we will
42
- pass this responsibility to to SIG Architecture Production Readiness subproject
43
- or to SIG Architecture generally for reassignment at the leads’ discretion.
57
+ Note that ideally the criteria should be extendable to other areas (e.g.
58
+ security), but that's not the goal by itself.
44
59
45
60
## Stakeholders
46
61
@@ -64,7 +79,8 @@ involved:
64
79
Input on reliability gaps in their areas.
65
80
66
81
The group will be also reaching out to users and cluster operator
67
- (e.g. via surveys), to build the full picture.
82
+ (e.g. via surveys), to build the full picture. We will likely leverage
83
+ the CNCF end-user group for this purpose.
68
84
69
85
In the later phase improving reliability, every single SIG may potentially
70
86
be involved depending on the findings from the initial phase.
0 commit comments