Formation of WG Naming #4884

+- A list of terms to avoid in codebases across the organization
+- A timeline on which to replace component names in the kubernetes/kubernetes
+  codebase
+- A revised Code of Conduct including the list of terms to avoid


Our code of conduct is tied to the Contributor Covenant, so my feeling is we don't add this explicitly to the CoC itself, and instead offer guidance in the areas of documentation where it's appropriate. If someone continues using terminology we've eliminated from the project, we should provide guidance and evaluate on a case-by-case basis. It took a non-trivial amount of time to change terminology in the past, so we should expect a transition time.

As @jdumars mentions, we currently source text from the CNCF CoC policy (which is based on Contributor Covenant). If we find ways we can strengthen or clarify it, it's not impossible to do -- even advocating for those changes CNCF wide if need be. That said, I wouldn't say this is an explicit must as far as exit criteria for the WG, to modify it. It would be a larger undertaking. So perhaps strike this as a formal goal, and revisit with the CoCC as needed?

@jdumars I think not embedding it in the COC is reasonable, however I want to emphasize that we don't want to provide just provide guidance – we want to provide binding guidance.

Initiatives like this one often become wasted time because it's easy to produce guidance but hard to follow-through. The initial idea behind enshrining these requirements in the COC was to make them, well required, rather than suggested.

I'm happy to leave the format/final home fuzzy, but I would emphasize that the WG's recommendations are expected to be followed through on and adhered to in future.

Maybe..

Suggested change

- A revised Code of Conduct including the list of terms to avoid

Strike this line, and edit this one?

Given that the CoC already covers inappropriate or harassing language in code and documentation, the proposed result here is for this WG to extend or specify the list of terms or conditions when the CoC Committee would be called to act. In other words, this WG proposal, if it accomplishes its goal (and, personally, I think this is a great goal) would add additional work for the CoC Committee (at least under the current charter).

With that in mind, I would like to propose that the CoC Committee be considered a stakeholder SIG and one of our five members be added to the initial WG-leads list for WG-naming. I think that this WG and the CoCC work hand-in-hand to craft this language and then to roll out or advise on the implementation path.

I am volunteering to represent the committee for this work.

jdumars · 2020-06-24T04:54:16Z

wg-naming/README.md

+    from renaming, like deprecations
+  - Collaborate with SIG Docs and SIG Contributor Experience on documenting
+    language recommendations and processes
+  - Work with the Code of Conduct Committee to add code architecture to the COC


We will help find a good home for this.

(Added as a post-formation discussion point.)

@justaugustus As this was added to the post-formation discussion point, should this line still exist in the goals?

@cblecker -- intentionally duplicated, so we'd know where to edit the language later

jdumars · 2020-06-24T04:57:05Z

I know it's up to the steering committee to ultimately enact this change, but I want it on the record, here, for all of giternity, that this is one of our proudest moments as a community.

nikhita

@justaugustus @celestehorgan @zacharysarah thank you so much for taking the initiative to kick this off!

Definitely agree with what @jdumars said -- makes me feel so proud to be a part of a community that takes this seriously and embraces these changes. ❤️ 😊

Left some logistical questions, but love it overall!

sigs.yaml

nikhita · 2020-06-24T09:39:16Z

wg-naming/README.md

+  - Improving clarity of codebases and documentation by replacing idioms,
+    metaphors and slang specific to the English language
+- Create a list of terms to avoid and propose alternatives
+- Define a process by which any member of the Kubernetes organization can


nit: s/organization/project everywhere in this doc

Maybe it's just me, the word "organization" reads to me as the GitHub org while "project" seems more encompassing

nit: The goal is:
Define a process to propose [and evaluate] a language (this is quite broad) recommendation

I think this wording could be changed (or possibly hold off on these specifics):
have *them* evaluated based on a rubric
see *them* implemented across *all* codebases

nikhita · 2020-06-24T09:40:58Z

wg-naming/README.md

+    metaphors and slang specific to the English language
+- Create a list of terms to avoid and propose alternatives
+- Define a process by which any member of the Kubernetes organization can
+  propose a language recommendation, have them evaluated based on a rubric, and


Want to make sure I understand what "language recommendation" means here. Would it be something like "I'd like to recommend the project not to use XXX term because of YYY connotation"?

Along those lines, yes.

The idea with this bullet point is to accommodate the future with a process, so that the next time we're in a cultural moment like this one, we won't need to go through the WG formation process again. It'll essentially be documenting the how-to of proposing a change, and how any stakeholders involved in the future should evaluate that request.

I suggest instead of "evaluated based on a rubric" you add another line item about defining a process for evaluating proposals. So, a process for suggesting some language is harmful, and a process for evaluating suggestions. Then the specifics of those processes don't need to block getting this PR merged.

(I'm not claiming a rubric is the wrong way to go, just that there's probably a discussion to be had and it doesn't need to happen here.)

(sorry for poor conversational flow, github hadn't shown me the previous comment)

Taking these suggestions and implementing per https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/4884/files#r445263740

nikhita · 2020-06-24T09:43:19Z

wg-naming/README.md

+    implementation timeline and strategies for dealing with follow-up issues
+    from renaming, like deprecations
+  - Collaborate with SIG Docs and SIG Contributor Experience on documenting
+    language recommendations and processes


Would this also involve renaming the master branch for all repos and would renaming the branch be a criteria for dissolution? It's heavily tied to how quickly and widely GitHub responds so I just want us to be cognizant of that.

At the moment, CNCF is planning to wait for GitHub to roll out changes regarding master branch naming. We're hoping that waiting on GitHub to make changes centrally results in less tooling issues down the line.

Ultimately the choice lies with the community, but I would strongly recommend Kubernetes take the same tactic. Personally I would not include this discussion in the WG's domain – the WG should focus on Kubernetes and related projects only, not the wording in the tooling, code language or libraries Kubernetes uses.

Yes, we're waiting for GitHub's lead here, and they should have a response soon.
(Discussed during the 6/25 GitHub Administration meeting.)

I'm taking point on this from the WG Naming side and will open an issue for this later in the week.

(Added as a post-formation discussion point.)

nikhita · 2020-06-24T09:46:28Z

wg-naming/README.md

+- A timeline on which to replace component names in the kubernetes/kubernetes
+  codebase


Few questions here:

Would this WG focus only on k/k? My understanding was that it would look at naming practices across all our repos (even k-sigs, k-csi, k-client), docs, etc.

Maybe it would be better to rename "component names" to something slightly more...generic? Just to ensure that we don't tie the dissolution criteria to only component names... 🤔

Would the WG disband after a timeline has been agreed upon or would it disband after all the changes have been made as per the timeline?

FWIW, I personally would find it helpful if the group stuck around until changes have been made. The model I have is WG-Apply, which existed until server side apply was implemented.

I haven't conferred with @justaugustus on this, so he may disagree, but here's my thoughts:

Would this WG focus only on k/k? My understanding was that it would look at naming practices across all our repos (even k-sigs, k-csi, k-client), docs, etc.

Per an earlier comment, we're changing the wording in this WG to address the Kubernetes project – so presumably.. everything? 😅

Maybe it would be better to rename "component names" to something slightly more...generic? Just to ensure that we don't tie the dissolution criteria to only component names... 🤔

+1! "feature names?" "method names"? I'm unsure. I'll brainstorm on this for a bit.

Would the WG disband after a timeline has been agreed upon or would it disband after all the changes have been made as per the timeline?

Personally I'd like to stick around until work is executed for accountability's sake. This isn't high priority work in relation to new releases, for example, but I think it's high importance and I think having the WG around to see the work through would be good.

(Added as a post-formation discussion point.)

Per an earlier comment, we're changing the wording in this WG to address the Kubernetes project – so presumably.. everything? sweat_smile

Agreed that the goal is to serve across the project, not just kubernetes/kubernetes.

Maybe it would be better to rename "component names" to something slightly more...generic? Just to ensure that we don't tie the dissolution criteria to only component names... thinking

+1! "feature names?" "method names"? I'm unsure. I'll brainstorm on this for a bit.

Yep. We can workshop the language post-formation.

Personally I'd like to stick around until work is executed for accountability's sake. This isn't high priority work in relation to new releases, for example, but I think it's high importance and I think having the WG around to see the work through would be good.

Agreed. I also intend to action on changes ahead of WG dissolution.

nikhita · 2020-06-30T14:57:49Z

/lgtm
/approve

(from both contribex and steering hat on)

k8s-ci-robot · 2020-06-30T14:58:08Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dims, justaugustus, nikhita

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [dims,nikhita]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

mrbobbytables · 2020-06-30T14:59:15Z

/lgtm
I have a few concerns but they look to be addressed in post-formation goals.

cblecker

One question, otherwise lgtm

cblecker · 2020-06-30T16:49:12Z

wg-naming/README.md

+    from renaming, like deprecations
+  - Collaborate with SIG Docs and SIG Contributor Experience on documenting
+    language recommendations and processes
+  - Work with the Code of Conduct Committee to add code architecture to the COC


@justaugustus As this was added to the post-formation discussion point, should this line still exist in the goals?

cblecker · 2020-06-30T16:49:33Z

wg-naming/README.md

+- A timeline on which to replace component names in the kubernetes/kubernetes
+  codebase
+- Defined long-term ownership of the policies and processes this WG creates
+


non-blocking nit: whitespace

@cblecker -- intentional. see the next line.

parispittman · 2020-06-30T17:31:14Z

lgtm :) thanks for doing this y'all. it will have a ton of impact in our community and the cloud native community at large.

zacharysarah · 2020-06-30T18:15:02Z

/lgtm from SIG Docs 👍

cblecker · 2020-06-30T18:29:51Z

/lgtm
both with my contribex and steering hats on 🧢

spiffxp · 2020-06-30T18:54:12Z

/lgtm
as steering committee member and sig testing chair

lachie83 · 2020-06-30T19:38:04Z

/lgtm
as steering committee member.

jimangel · 2020-06-30T21:11:37Z

/lgtm
Docs
Thanks for everyone's input and work, this is a great initiative and look forward to helping in anyway I can!

derekwaynecarr · 2020-06-30T21:16:50Z

I think the dissolution criteria describe the goals without getting into the tactics.

/lgtm
wearing my hat as steering member and sig-arch co-chair.

While wearing my Red Hat, I want to draw attention to the following:
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/making-open-source-more-inclusive-eradicating-problematic-language

My hope is that this WG acts as an entry point for Red Hatters to participate in auditing the work of the project, identifying divisive language, and standardizing together on appropriate terminology across the broader technical community so we can safely stage any required changes and avoid breaking our users that ultimately depend on the work we do together.

jdumars · 2020-06-30T23:35:57Z

my official:
/lgtm

dims · 2020-07-01T01:23:58Z

Highlighting a comment from @deads2k - #4884 (comment)

dims · 2020-07-01T18:21:05Z

@justaugustus please feel to remove the hold when you have all the 👍 's you needed.

celestehorgan · 2020-07-01T18:22:04Z

@derekwaynecarr We would love to see Red Hatters involved :)

I can't speak for the other chairs, but one of my chief concerns is keeping a relatively high ratio of people close to the code involved, so please, send them our way!

justaugustus · 2020-07-01T19:25:09Z

Thanks for the thoughtful reviews, everyone!
/hold cancel

justaugustus · 2020-07-01T22:54:28Z

Now that the label exists...
/wg naming

k8s-ci-robot · 2020-07-01T22:54:29Z

@justaugustus: The label(s) wg/naming cannot be applied, because the repository doesn't have them

In response to this:

Now that the label exists...
/wg naming

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

justaugustus · 2020-07-01T23:40:43Z

Take two, now that the job has finished running.
/wg naming

k8s-ci-robot requested review from idvoretskyi and mrbobbytables June 24, 2020 01:29

k8s-ci-robot added area/community-management area/slack-management Issues or PRs related to the Slack Management subproject sig/contributor-experience Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Contributor Experience. labels Jun 24, 2020

k8s-ci-robot added sig/architecture Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Architecture. sig/docs Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Docs. labels Jun 24, 2020

justaugustus mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2020

label_sync: Add WG Naming label kubernetes/test-infra#18063

Merged

k8s-ci-robot assigned cblecker, derekwaynecarr, dims, lachie83, nikhita, parispittman and spiffxp Jun 24, 2020

jdumars reviewed Jun 24, 2020

View reviewed changes

nikhita reviewed Jun 24, 2020

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot assigned castrojo Jun 30, 2020

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 30, 2020

k8s-ci-robot assigned mrbobbytables Jun 30, 2020

cblecker reviewed Jun 30, 2020

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot assigned jimangel Jun 30, 2020

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jul 1, 2020

k8s-ci-robot merged commit f5e6318 into kubernetes:master Jul 1, 2020

k8s-ci-robot added the wg/naming Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to WG Naming. label Jul 1, 2020

neolit123 mentioned this pull request Jul 10, 2020

Remove DeprecatedMightBeMasterNode() kubernetes/kubernetes#92845

Merged

justaugustus mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2020

Add WG Naming teams kubernetes/org#2025

Merged

prometherion mentioned this pull request Nov 12, 2020

deprecate the KUBERNETES_MASTER environment variable kubernetes/client-go#892

Closed

		- A timeline on which to replace component names in the kubernetes/kubernetes
		codebase

Formation of WG Naming #4884

Formation of WG Naming #4884

Conversation

justaugustus commented Jun 24, 2020

justaugustus commented Jun 24, 2020

justaugustus commented Jun 24, 2020

justaugustus commented Jun 24, 2020

justaugustus commented Jun 24, 2020

justaugustus commented Jun 24, 2020

cblecker commented Jun 24, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jdumars commented Jun 24, 2020

nikhita left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kbhawkey Jun 24, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nikhita Jun 24, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

spiffxp Jun 26, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

justaugustus Jun 30, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nikhita commented Jun 30, 2020

k8s-ci-robot commented Jun 30, 2020

mrbobbytables commented Jun 30, 2020

cblecker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

parispittman commented Jun 30, 2020

zacharysarah commented Jun 30, 2020

cblecker commented Jun 30, 2020

spiffxp commented Jun 30, 2020

lachie83 commented Jun 30, 2020

jimangel commented Jun 30, 2020

derekwaynecarr commented Jun 30, 2020

jdumars commented Jun 30, 2020

dims commented Jul 1, 2020

dims commented Jul 1, 2020

celestehorgan commented Jul 1, 2020

justaugustus commented Jul 1, 2020

justaugustus commented Jul 1, 2020

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 1, 2020

justaugustus commented Jul 1, 2020

kbhawkey Jun 24, 2020 •

edited

Loading

nikhita Jun 24, 2020 •

edited

Loading

spiffxp Jun 26, 2020 •

edited

Loading

justaugustus Jun 30, 2020 •

edited

Loading