Merge pull request #1554 from justaugustus/issue-triage

keps/contribex: Add KEP-1553 (Issue Triage Workflow and Automation)

Author: k8s-ci-robot

keps/sig-contributor-experience/1553-issue-triage/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,270 @@
+# KEP-1553: Issue Triage Workflow and Automation
+
+<!-- toc -->
+- [Release Signoff Checklist](#release-signoff-checklist)
+- [Summary](#summary)
+  - [Note to Reviewers](#note-to-reviewers)
+- [Motivation](#motivation)
+  - [Goals](#goals)
+  - [Non-Goals](#non-goals)
+- [Proposal](#proposal)
+  - [User Stories](#user-stories)
+    - [Group Leads](#group-leads)
+    - [Reviewers and Approvers](#reviewers-and-approvers)
+    - [Contributors](#contributors)
+  - [Notes/Constraints/Caveats (optional)](#notesconstraintscaveats-optional)
+  - [Risks and Mitigations](#risks-and-mitigations)
+- [Design Details](#design-details)
+  - [Graduation Criteria](#graduation-criteria)
+  - [Phase 0](#phase-0)
+    - [needs-triage and triage/accepted labels](#needs-triage-and-triageaccepted-labels)
+    - [Remove or rename unused triage/** labels](#remove-or-rename-unused-triage-labels)
+- [Implementation History](#implementation-history)
+- [Drawbacks](#drawbacks)
+- [Alternatives](#alternatives)
+- [Infrastructure Needed](#infrastructure-needed)
+<!-- /toc -->
+
+## Release Signoff Checklist
+
+- [ ] Enhancement issue in release milestone, which links to KEP dir in [kubernetes/enhancements] (not the initial KEP PR)
+- [ ] KEP approvers have approved the KEP status as `implementable`
+- [ ] Design details are appropriately documented
+- [ ] Test plan is in place, giving consideration to SIG Architecture and SIG Testing input
+- [ ] Graduation criteria is in place
+- [ ] "Implementation History" section is up-to-date for milestone
+- [ ] User-facing documentation has been created in [kubernetes/website], for publication to [kubernetes.io]
+- [ ] Supporting documentation e.g., additional design documents, links to mailing list discussions/SIG meetings, relevant PRs/issues, release notes
+
+[kubernetes.io]: https://kubernetes.io/
+[kubernetes/enhancements]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements
+[kubernetes/kubernetes]: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes
+[kubernetes/website]: https://github.com/kubernetes/website
+
+## Summary
+
+To ease the burden of SIG/area reviewers/approvers, we would like to prescribe
+a triage workflow and supporting automation.
+
+### Note to Reviewers
+
+For this `provisional` phase, the details of this KEP are left intentionally
+light. There was significant discussion across issues, mailing list threads,
+and PRs that didn't lead to forward progress because it seemed we were trying
+to solve everything at once.
+
+Here we attempt to scope a single deliverable before moving on to discussing
+workflow, label states, and entry/exit criteria.
+
+## Motivation
+
+At present, there are [2,155 open issues and 902 pull requests](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aopen) open in
+`kubernetes/kubernetes`.
+
+- [356 are categorized as `lifecycle/stale`](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/labels/lifecycle%2Fstale)
+- [246 are categorized as `lifecycle/rotten`](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/labels/lifecycle%2Frotten)
+- [690 are categorized as `lifecycle/frozen`](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/labels/lifecycle%2Ffrozen)
+
+This makes for about 20% of open issues/PRs that are in some state of staleness.
+If we consider items marked as `lifecycle/frozen`, then we're looking at around
+42% of issues/PRs that could potentially require attention.
+
+### Goals
+
+See [User Stories](#user-stories).
+
+<<[UNRESOLVED]>>
+
+### Non-Goals
+
+- Prescribing an issue triage workflow for all projects within Kubernetes orgs
+
+<<[/UNRESOLVED]>>
+
+## Proposal
+
+### User Stories
+
+#### Group Leads
+
+As a SIG Chair/Technical Lead, WG/UG organizer, or subproject owner, I want to
+be able to easily triage my group's backlog of open issues and PRs to accelerate
+merge velocity and issue resolution.
+
+#### Reviewers and Approvers
+
+As a reviewer/approver, I want a simple system to categorize issues/PRs in my
+purview, so that I can prioritize what to review first.
+
+#### Contributors
+
+As a contributor, I want to be able to submit issues or PRs and:
+
+- understand how the community works to address new submissions
+- have some assurance that they will be routed to the correct group
+- have them addressed in a timely manner
+
+<<[UNRESOLVED]>>
+
+### Notes/Constraints/Caveats (optional)
+
+<!--
+What are the caveats to the proposal?
+What are some important details that didn't come across above.
+Go in to as much detail as necessary here.
+This might be a good place to talk about core concepts and how they releate.
+-->
+
+<<[/UNRESOLVED]>>
+
+<<[UNRESOLVED]>>
+
+### Risks and Mitigations
+
+<!--
+What are the risks of this proposal and how do we mitigate.  Think broadly.
+For example, consider both security and how this will impact the larger
+kubernetes ecosystem.
+
+How will security be reviewed and by whom?
+
+How will UX be reviewed and by whom?
+
+Consider including folks that also work outside the SIG or subproject.
+-->
+
+<<[/UNRESOLVED]>>
+
+## Design Details
+
+<!--
+This section should contain enough information that the specifics of your
+change are understandable.  This may include API specs (though not always
+required) or even code snippets.  If there's any ambiguity about HOW your
+proposal will be implemented, this is the place to discuss them.
+-->
+
+### Graduation Criteria
+
+<!--
+**Note:** *Not required until targeted at a release.*
+-->
+
+_Not required in `provisional` state._
+
+### Phase 0
+
+#### needs-triage and triage/accepted labels
+
+We currently have a Prow plugin called `require-matching-label`, which requires
+specific labels to be set on a issue or pull request.
+
+Examples in [kubernetes/kubernetes] include:
+
+- `needs-kind` (needs a `kind/foo` label)
+- `needs-priority` (needs a `priority/bar` label)
+- `needs-sig` (needs a `sig/baz` label)
+
+Here we propose [introducing two new labels](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/16298):
+
+- `needs-triage`
+- `triage/accepted`
+
+The `needs-triage` label would be automatically applied to incoming issues.
+
+Current contributors would then need to inspect issues with the `needs-triage`
+label and attempt to triage them.
+
+Upon determining that an issue is ready to be actively worked on, an org member
+can apply the `triage/accepted` label using the following bot command:
+
+```shell
+/triage accept
+```
+
+(Alternatively, contributors with write access to `kubernetes/kubernetes` would be
+able to manually apply the `triage/accepted` label.)
+
+**Considerations:**
+
+- `triage/accepted` should be considered a placeholder name for the
+  label in this provisional state, depending on what we decide is the most
+  appropriate name.
+- There will be an expectation that only SIG members designated to triage
+  issues are applying triage labels. We're considering limiting application of
+  this label to the [`milestone-maintainers` GitHub team](https://github.com/orgs/kubernetes/teams/milestone-maintainers).
+
+From here, a group can search the open items labeled with
+`triage/accepted` and proceed to work on them.
+
+A nice example of a written SIG workflow is the [grooming document from
+SIG Cluster Lifecycle](https://git.k8s.io/community/sig-cluster-lifecycle/grooming.md).
+
+#### Remove or rename unused triage/** labels
+
+As we're considering reviving the `triage/**` labels in this workflow, it's
+important that all labels with this affix are up-to-date, removing any
+`triage/**` label deemed to be unused.
+
+The current list of `triage/**` labels is as follows:
+
+- `triage/duplicate`
+- `triage/needs-information`
+- `triage/not-reproducible`
+- `triage/support`
+- `triage/unresolved`
+
+We propose here removing the following labels:
+
+- `triage/duplicate`
+- `triage/not-reproducible`
+- `triage/unresolved`
+
+We rename the following labels:
+
+- `triage/support` --> `kind/support`: Issue has been identified as a support
+  question, which should be routed to the appropriate forum and closed
+  immediately afterwards
+- `triage/needs-information` --> `lifecycle/needs-information`: Issue requires
+  more information (from submitter or SIG) in order to work on it
+
+Which leaves the following label and accompanying definition:
+
+- `triage/accepted`: Issue has been triaged by a SIG representative and
+  is ready to be worked
+
+## Implementation History
+
+- 2020-02-15 - [Issue Triage KEP submitted as `provisional`](https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/pull/1554)
+- 2020-02-15 - [Issue Triage Enhancement issue](https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/1553) opened
+- 2020-02-14 - [Carry PR opened](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/16298) for `needs-triage` and `triage/accepted` labels
+- 2020-02-14 - [Carry PR opened](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/16299) to rename `triage/**` labels to `close/**`
+- 2019-05-30 - [Original PR opened](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/12814) to rename `triage/**` labels to `close/**`
+- 2019-05-01 - ["Deadlines are horrible"](https://groups.google.com/d/topic/kubernetes-sig-release/dGVBrlkOXQo/discussion) discussion
+- 2019-03-18 - [Original PR opened](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/11818) for `needs-triage` and `lifecycle/ready` labels
+- 2019-03-18 - [k/k-wide triage workflow improvements](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/issues/3456) issue opened
+- 2019-03-08 - ["Issue triage again"](https://groups.google.com/d/topic/kubernetes-sig-contribex/BvGmOQ0v5f0/discussion) discussion
+- 2016-11-14 - [Initial mailing list](https://groups.google.com/d/topic/kubernetes-sig-contribex/mI7kuTFa_I4/discussion) discussion on issue triage
+
+## Drawbacks
+
+N/A
+
+<<[UNRESOLVED]>>
+
+## Alternatives
+
+<!--
+What other approaches did you consider and why did you rule them out?  These do
+not need to be as detailed as the proposal, but should include enough
+information to express the idea and why it was not acceptable.
+-->
+
+<<[/UNRESOLVED]>>
+
+## Infrastructure Needed
+
+At the current stage of this proposal, Prow already supports the behaviors we require:
+
+- Adding new labels
+- Enforcing label requirements on issues/PRs

keps/sig-contributor-experience/1553-issue-triage/kep.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+title: Issue Triage Workflow and Automation
+status: provisional
+owning-sig: sig-contributor-experience
+participating-sigs:
+  - sig-pm
+  - sig-release
+authors:
+  - "@justaugustus"
+reviewers:
+  - "@alejandrox1"
+  - "@mrbobbytables"
+  - "@logicalhan"
+  - "@smourapina"
+  - "@thockin"
+approvers:
+  - "@cblecker"
+  - "@nikhita"
+creation-date: 2020-02-15
+see-also:
+replaces: