You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Completion of this due diligence document, resolution of concerns raised, and presented for public comment satisfies the Due Diligence Review criteria.
Additional documentation as appropriate for project type, e.g.: installation documentation, end user documentation, reference implementation and/or code samples.
Governance and Maintainers
Note: this section may be augmented by the completion of a Governance Review from TAG Contributor Strategy.
Suggested
Clear and discoverable project governance documentation.
Governance has continuously been iterated upon by the project as a result of their experience applying it, with the governance history demonstrating evolution of maturity alongside the project's maturity evolution.
Governance is up to date with actual project activities, including any meetings, elections, leadership, or approval processes.
Governance clearly documents vendor-neutrality of project direction.
Document how the project makes decisions on leadership, contribution acceptance, requests to the CNCF, and changes to governance or project goals.
Document how role, function-based members, or sub-teams are assigned, onboarded, and removed for specific teams (example: Security Response Committee).
TODO:
Document a complete maintainer lifecycle process (including roles, onboarding, offboarding, and emeritus status).
Demonstrate usage of the maintainer lifecycle with outcomes, either through the addition or replacement of maintainers as project events have required.
If the project has subprojects: subproject leadership, contribution, maturity status documented, including add/remove process.
Required
Document complete list of current maintainers, including names, contact information, domain of responsibility, and affiliation.
List and document all project communication channels, including subprojects (mail list/slack/etc.). List any non-public communications channels and what their special purpose is.
Document project goals and objectives that illustrate the project’s differentiation in the Cloud Native landscape as well as outlines how this project fulfills an outstanding need and/or solves a problem differently. This can also be satisfied by completing a General Technical Review.
Document what the project does, and why it does it - including viable cloud native use cases. This can also be satisfied by completing a General Technical Review.
Document and maintain a public roadmap or other forward looking planning document or tracking mechanism.
Document overview of project architecture and software design that demonstrates viable cloud native use cases, as part of the project's documentation. This can also be satisfied by completing a General Technical Review and capturing the output in the project's documentation.
Used in appropriate capacity by at least 3 independent + indirect/direct adopters, (these are not required to be in the publicly documented list of adopters)
The project provided the TOC with a list of adopters for verification of use of the project at the level expected, i.e. production use for graduation, dev/test for incubation.
TOC verification of adopters.
Refer to the Adoption portion of this document.
Clearly documented integrations and/or compatibility with other CNCF projects as well as non-CNCF projects.
External secrets has a long history of being used together with Flux, Argo, Helm and other CNCF projects.
Additional Information
External Secrets was present on KubeCon NA and has a rapidly growing community. Greater companies are using it internally for which verification is hard to come by but we know about them. I'm in the process to get some kind of recognition from those companies.
Something this is difficult, because being a security tool, not many might divulge this information freely.
We believe that the project came a long way and has matured considerably. There might be some missing or outdated information here and there, but we are willing to and able to fix those and keep them updated regularly ( thinking about the adoption process or clearly defined security roles, etc ).
Also, we have to be more diligent in following the project board. Which can be achieved.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
external-secrets-operator Incubation Application
Project Repo(s): https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets
Project Site: https://external-secrets.io/latest
Sub-Projects: https://github.com/external-secrets/bitwarden-sdk-server
Communication: https://kubernetes.slack.com/messages/external-secrets
Project points of contacts: Moritz Johner( @moolen ), Lucas Severo Alves ( @knelasevero ), Gustavo Fernandes de Carvalho ( @gusfcarvalho ) ,Gergely Brautigam ( @Skarlso )
Incubation Criteria Summary for external-secrets-operator
Application Level Assertion
Adoption Assertion
The project has been adopted by the following organizations in a testing and integration or production capacity:
https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets/blob/main/ADOPTERS.md
Application Process Principles
Suggested
N/A
Required
Completion of this due diligence document, resolution of concerns raised, and presented for public comment satisfies the Due Diligence Review criteria.
Governance and Maintainers
Note: this section may be augmented by the completion of a Governance Review from TAG Contributor Strategy.
Suggested
https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md
TODO:
Required
https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets/blob/main/MAINTAINERS.md
https://external-secrets.io/main/contributing/coc/
TODO:
Contributors and Community
Note: this section may be augmented by the completion of a Governance Review from TAG Contributor Strategy.
Suggested
Question: Is this sufficient?
https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets/blob/main/docs/contributing/process.md
Required
https://external-secrets.io/main/contributing/process/
https://external-secrets.io/main/contributing/process/
https://external-secrets.io/main/contributing/process/ Support and Questions section.
We have weekly external secrets calls and a youtube channel -> https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets?tab=readme-ov-file#bi-weekly-development-meeting
TODO:
https://externalsecretsoperator.devstats.cncf.io/d/8/dashboards?orgId=1
Engineering Principles
Suggested
https://external-secrets.io/main/contributing/roadmap/
https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets/releases
Required
https://github.com/orgs/external-secrets/projects/2/views/1
https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets/blob/main/docs/introduction/overview.md
There are a lot of documentations on the website as well about architecture usage and further information.
https://external-secrets.io/latest/introduction/overview/
https://external-secrets.io/latest/api/components/
https://external-secrets.io/latest/provider/aws-secrets-manager/
https://external-secrets.io/latest/examples/gitops-using-fluxcd/
https://external-secrets.io/main/contributing/release/
Security
Note: this section may be augmented by a joint-assessment performed by TAG Security.
Suggested
N/A
Required
https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets/blob/main/SECURITY.md
7.9 app openSSF score -> https://securityscorecards.dev/viewer/?uri=github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets
TODO:
https://app.fossa.com/projects/git%2Bgithub.com%2Fexternal-secrets%2Fexternal-secrets/refs/branch/main/210b39715ee37ab56e1575cf5a95303c9037f696/preview
Ecosystem
Suggested
N/A
Required
https://github.com/external-secrets/external-secrets/blob/main/ADOPTERS.md
The project provided the TOC with a list of adopters for verification of use of the project at the level expected, i.e. production use for graduation, dev/test for incubation.
Refer to the Adoption portion of this document.
External secrets has a long history of being used together with Flux, Argo, Helm and other CNCF projects.
Additional Information
External Secrets was present on KubeCon NA and has a rapidly growing community. Greater companies are using it internally for which verification is hard to come by but we know about them. I'm in the process to get some kind of recognition from those companies.
Something this is difficult, because being a security tool, not many might divulge this information freely.
We believe that the project came a long way and has matured considerably. There might be some missing or outdated information here and there, but we are willing to and able to fix those and keep them updated regularly ( thinking about the adoption process or clearly defined security roles, etc ).
Also, we have to be more diligent in following the project board. Which can be achieved.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: