docs(operations): allow CNCF Case Study as adopter interview substitute - #2282
docs(operations): allow CNCF Case Study as adopter interview substitute#2282angellk wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
ae2f719 to
f01b57f
Compare
Extends the adopter interview substitution guidance (cncf#2256) so a published CNCF Case Study, in addition to a published TAB Reference Architecture, may serve in place of an individual adopter interview. It is at the TOC member's discretion who is leading the Due Diligence for Moving Levels to determine whether the Reference Architecture or Case Study meets the necessary standards and includes the information the Due Diligence requires. Signed-off-by: Karena Angell <karena.angell@gmail.com>
f01b57f to
4c8c2c3
Compare
|
Looks good overall; I have one requested change before merge. |
…udy substitutes Address jrsapi review on cncf#2282: apply the same independence check used for interview participants when a Reference Architecture or Case Study substitutes for an adopter interview, so the evidence reflects an independent organization's operational use rather than the project team's or a vendor's account. Signed-off-by: Karena Angell <karena.angell@gmail.com>
|
Thanks @jrsapi - good catch. I've added your suggested language so the same independence check applies to substitutes:
Pushed in 527d08b. I also mirrored it to the contribute-site guide and the announcement blog (cncf/contribute-site#397) to keep the two in sync. |
| > **Note on Interview Participant Composition:** TOC members should prioritize interviewing adopter contacts who work with the project in an operational or user capacity. If the primary contact is a project maintainer or holds a project governance role, ask them to include a colleague from the same organization who uses the project operationally. Contributors from adopting organizations who have become maintainers can reflect strong community engagement, which is a positive signal. However, if such interviewees make up a meaningful proportion of the pool, overall results may skew overly positive. If you do not feel you have collected enough diverse perspectives, request interviews with additional adopters. | ||
|
|
||
| > **TAB Reference Architecture Substitution:** A project's inclusion in a published [TAB Reference Architecture](https://github.com/cncf/tab/blob/main/process/reference-architectures.md) may serve as a replacement for an individual adopter interview. Reference architectures represent validated, production-level adoption by the submitting organization and provide equivalent signal to an adopter interview. TOC members should note the reference architecture in the adoption section of the Due Diligence in place of the interview summary it replaces. | ||
| > **Reference Architecture or Case Study Substitution:** Submitting adopters as part of a project's application to move levels has always been, and remains, a requirement. This is not a change to that requirement; the TOC is clarifying the forms of validated adoption evidence that may satisfy it. A project's inclusion in a published [TAB Reference Architecture](https://github.com/cncf/tab/blob/main/process/reference-architectures.md) or a published [CNCF Case Study](https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/main/policies-guidance/case-study-guidelines.md) may serve as a replacement for an individual adopter interview. Both represent validated, production-level adoption by the submitting organization and can provide equivalent signal to an adopter interview. When evaluating a Reference Architecture or Case Study, the TOC member should confirm that it demonstrates an independent organization's operational use of the project, rather than relying solely on the project team's or a vendor's account. It is at the TOC member's discretion who is leading the Due Diligence for Moving Levels to determine whether the Reference Architecture or Case Study meets the necessary standards and includes the requisite information the Due Diligence requires to determine whether the project meets the requirements of the level in process. Where it does, TOC members should note the Reference Architecture or Case Study in the adoption section of the Due Diligence in place of the interview summary it replaces. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As it stands I think this is appropriate. The initial language feels more like it qualifies the content rather than being content itself.
This is not a change to that requirement; the TOC is clarifying the forms of validated adoption evidence that may satisfy it.
and the preceding sentence feel a bit abstract when reading the full guide in isolation. Does the reader understand why/what is being clarified - and does it need to be explicitly defined as a clarification?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please suggest language that would help clarify!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am curious what you think about dropping those first two sentences entirely?
3 participants
Summary
Extends the adopter interview substitution guidance added in #2256 (now merged) so that both a published TAB Reference Architecture and a published CNCF Case Study may serve in place of an individual adopter interview.
Adds that it is at the TOC sponsor's discretion during the Due Diligence to determine whether the Reference Architecture or Case Study meets the necessary standards and includes the requisite information the Due Diligence requires to determine whether the project meets the requirements of the level in process.
Changes
operations/dd-toc-guide.md: updated the substitution note in the Conducting Adopter Interviews section to cover Case Studies alongside Reference Architectures, and to state the sponsor-discretion standard.Test plan