Project Reviews and Governance Stages in the CNCF Ecosystem

Introduction

The Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) has grown from 30 projects in 2013 to 209 today, necessitating structured governance to manage its expansion. The TOC Project Reviews Working Group (WG) plays a critical role in ensuring projects evolve through maturity stages with appropriate governance models. This article explores the framework for project reviews, governance structures, and stage-specific considerations to guide effective project management within the CNCF ecosystem.

Project Reviews and Governance Models

Governance Principles

The CNCF emphasizes governance principles that prioritize community collaboration, clear role definitions, and efficient decision-making. Key principles include:

• Setting expectations for project goals and contributions.
• Avoiding unnecessary overhead by aligning contributions with project objectives.
• Adaptive governance that evolves with project needs rather than rigid perfection.

Governance Models

Three primary governance models are recommended based on project complexity:

1. Maintainer Committee Model (Recommended for most projects): Decisions are made through consensus, with voting allowed in specific cases. This model ensures shared responsibility and transparency.
2. Multi-tier Structure Model: Suitable for projects with multiple sub-projects requiring hierarchical leadership. This model allows for specialized governance layers.
3. Elected Steering Committee Model: Ideal for projects with diverse stakeholder groups, ensuring representation and rapid consensus.

Governance Requirements

All projects must adhere to CNCF behavior guidelines. Key requirements include:

• Lightweight governance for sub-projects during incubation, with clear maintainer roles.
• Formal governance documentation for graduated projects, detailing decision processes, leadership elections, and access controls.

Review Process and Steps

Preparation

Projects must use CNCF governance templates (e.g., maintainer committee model) to streamline reviews. Key preparatory steps include:

• Filling out an issue template with project details, governance model specifics, and execution examples (e.g., voting processes).
• Ensuring governance documents are accessible and aligned with CNCF standards.

Focus Areas

Reviews evaluate three core aspects:

1. Governance Documents: Must include decision-making processes, role definitions, and access controls.
2. Execution Verification: Demonstrate practical application of governance practices, such as security protocols and access management.
3. Evolution Planning: Outline governance changes and future improvements.

Case Study: Dapper Project

The Dapper project, using the steering committee model, underwent review with focus on:

• Role clarity and vendor neutrality.
• Security practices and integration with GitHub tools.
• Recommendations included enhancing role transparency and tooling integration.

Stage-Specific Review Focus

Day Zero (Planning Stage)

Key Questions:

• Service dependencies and storage requirements.
• Architecture design and API compatibility.
• Security self-assessment and compliance with standards like SLSA.

Considerations:

• Ensure project viability and user experience.
• Avoid premature neglect of governance and security needs.

Day One (Incubation Stage)

Key Questions:

• Configuration and startup processes for user adoption.
• Rollback and cleanup mechanisms for cluster stability.
• Upgrade compatibility and versioning strategies.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Usability, transparency, and community support.
• Reduce maintainer burden through collaborative processes.

Day Two (Graduation Stage)

Key Questions:

• Scalability and resource usage trends (CPU, memory, storage).
• Observability mechanisms (logs, metrics, tracing).
• Dependency management and fault tolerance strategies.

Considerations:

• Ensure ecosystem integration and long-term sustainability.
• Implement cost-aware practices (FinOps) and health monitoring.

Governance Evolution and Recommendations

Model Selection

Choose the simplest governance model that aligns with project size and complexity. Avoid over-engineering governance structures.

Continuous Improvement

Governance must evolve with the project lifecycle. Major changes require documented validation and community alignment.

Risk Management

Proactively address security practices, vendor neutrality, and compliance to prevent future crises.

Conclusion

The CNCF Project Reviews WG provides a structured framework for managing project maturity stages through adaptive governance. By aligning with CNCF standards, projects can ensure scalability, community engagement, and long-term sustainability. Key takeaways include:

• Prioritize lightweight governance during incubation.
• Document clear decision processes and leadership structures.
• Continuously refine governance models to match evolving project needs.
• Address security and compliance early to mitigate risks.

This framework enables projects to navigate growth stages effectively while maintaining alignment with CNCF’s mission of fostering cloud-native innovation.