Update the contributor-strategy.md information page for enduring validity.

[riaankleinhans]

The update aims to provide stable, timeless information that avoids references to individuals, working groups, and objectives subject to change, reducing maintenance efforts while ensuring up-to-date content.

Fix issue: cncf/tag-contributor-strategy#464

[aliok]

timeless information

+1 on this!

When I check the charter documents of other TAGs in this repository, I see they all have content and not just links to the charter documents in their own repository. Ex: network, app-delivery

IMO, it would be much better to have a single charter document. ...and, ideally all TAG charter docs in this repository should also go with the same approach.

[jberkus]

@TheFoxAtWork @amye

This raises a general question for the TOC.

Currently, most TAGs have duplicate (and inconsistent) information in the toc/tags folder, and in their individual repo READMEs. Where should canonical TAG information live? It needs to be one or the other, because clearly maintaining the same text in both places doesn't work.

[TheFoxAtWork]

I am generally in support of this so long as each TAG has governance in place to ensure any changes to their Charter received concurrence from the TOC prior to merge.
@jeefy given Amye is out, do you know if there is any reason TAG Charters need to exist within the TOC repo if we have processes in place to ensure updates are approved by the TOC?

[amye]

I am generally in support of this so long as each TAG has governance in place to ensure any changes to their Charter received concurrence from the TOC prior to merge. @jeefy given Amye is out, do you know if there is any reason TAG Charters need to exist within the TOC repo if we have processes in place to ensure updates are approved by the TOC?

This was sort of organically grown. We wanted one place to track all of the charters when they were approved, but given as the charters have shifted, that may not be as relevant anymore.

[amye]

We did some backlog grooming and I took this one -I've had a chance to review and this isn't quite the right place for this.
All of the other TAGs have their charters listed here, (and we'd end up undoing all of those too) so we have two options:
(1) Rename this one to be more of 'about TAG Contributor Strategy'
(2) Put this in the TAG CS repo.

@Riaankl - does that make sense?

[riaankleinhans]

We did some backlog grooming and I took this one -I've had a chance to review and this isn't quite the right place for this. All of the other TAGs have their charters listed here, (and we'd end up undoing all of those too) so we have two options: (1) Rename this one to be more of 'about TAG Contributor Strategy' (2) Put this in the TAG CS repo.

@Riaankl - does that make sense?

@amye yes, renaming it as "About CNCF TAG Contributor Strategy" is a good idea.

Our roadmapping and clean-up that we are working on in the TAG CS repo leaked out into this document.
The Charter here was a very dated copy of what is in the repo, so we went for less content that would hopefully have a longer shelf life and points to our repo. Then we only need to keep the TAG's own repo a tidy and as fresh as possible over time.

TIA

[amye]

Ok, so yes - but we're still overwriting the charter. Let's do this:
(1) Add an updated version of the TAG CS charter so that there's still continuity
(2) Rename this file

[riaankleinhans]

The charter live in the TAG CS repo.They got badly out of sync because there are two copies.
https://github.com/cncf/tag-contributor-strategy/blob/main/CHARTER.md

My thought about this was under "TOC/TAG" directory we only have a intro to each TAG that would not get dated, and a link to their repo that include their charter. (Kind of a restructuring proposal for all, but leading by example)

[TheFoxAtWork]

@riaankleinhans can you confirm if this PR is up to date with the recent recommendations and changes regarding the TAGs? If so, could you update the PR to resolve the existing conflicts?

[riaankleinhans]

No, this need to be updated.
Working with TAG CS to update their charter.

[angellk]

@riaankleinhans is there a status on this PR? Has TAG CS updated their charter?

[TheFoxAtWork]

LGTM

[TheFoxAtWork]

even with the charter out of date, it is outside the scope of this PR as i understand it. @riaankleinhans @mrbobbytables could you confirm so we can get this merged?

[linsun]

cc @linsun to review

[linsun]

@riaankleinhans could you resolve the merge conflicts pls?