[Governance Review]: Linkerd

[wmorgan]

Project Name

Linkerd

Project Website

https://linkerd.io

Contact Details 1

@wmorgan

Contact Details 2

@olix0r

Links to communication channels

slack.cncf.io

Reason for governance review request

Other (please specify in the “Additional Notes” input at the end of this form)

Are there any sub-projects, plugins, and related?

Not really, though there is a basic "extension" mechanism.

Governance model

In keeping with the project philosophy, governance is as simple as possible. Maintainers make decisions by consensus whenever possible but simple majority if not. A steering committee meets to review and formally represent the voice of the community. Anyone can become a maintainer; anyone who is an owner of a "non-trivial" Linkerd deployment is eligible to be on the steering committee.

Governance documents

• https://github.com/linkerd/linkerd2/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md
• https://github.com/linkerd/linkerd2/blob/main/STEERING.md

Governance Execution Examples

• Nominate Steve, Christian, and Dan to the Linkerd Steering Committee linkerd/linkerd2#12441
• update governance to introduce a director role linkerd/linkerd2#12262

Governance Evolution

• Reboot of steering committee, which had fallen into disuse: Nominate Steve, Christian, and Dan to the Linkerd Steering Committee linkerd/linkerd2#12441
• Introduction of a director role at the behest of the TOC: update governance to introduce a director role linkerd/linkerd2#12262

Any specific aspects of your governance structure are you seeking feedback on?

In a recent health check, the TOC has requested some specifics:

We invite the Linkerd project to work with TAG Contributor Strategy as a next step. This group is the most likely to be able to identify areas of growth and strategies for the future. We suggest that the project file a Governance review issue with TAG Contributor Strategy to perform a comprehensive governance review of the project to ensure that the project's own governance and processes (which are specific to Linkerd) best set it up for success, adherence to documented governance, and provide appropriate recommendations for the project to implement.
We're expecting that the TAG CS review will work with Linkerd to confirm that the governance process is open and transparent; that it enables the project direction to be set by the Linkerd community in accordance with their governance, and that it does not openly favor one vendor or organization over another in setting its direction and therefore avoids introducing structures that permit favoritism to occur within the project. This is separate from the previous criteria of maintainers from at least 2 organizations which the project previously received an exception for and should also be evaluated for impact on the project as part of the review.
It is further requested that the project seek specific feedback from TAG CS on how to create feedback loops with both contributors and adopters to improve and understand needs and features being requested of the project as it pertains to their defined scope.

Do you have any concerns or specific areas where you feel your governance could be improved?

No response

Additional notes and resources

Linkerd is in a somewhat unique situation in the graduated project ecosystem in that its maintainers all work for the same company. We've made no attempt to hide or paper over this fact, and for a variety of reasons I believe this is likely to always be the case for Linkerd.

In this review, we'd like validation of our belief that despite the single vendor ecosystem, Linkerd's governance is truly open: it is possible for anyone from any company to get involved with Linkerd, and we are not preventing anyone from being involved in Linkerd through governance shenanigans or bad behavior. We committed to open governance a long time ago and I believe we have held true to that principle.