mirror of
https://github.com/krkn-chaos/krkn.git
synced 2026-04-15 06:57:28 +00:00
12 KiB
12 KiB
Review Project Moving Level Evaluation
[x] I have reviewed the TOC's moving level readiness triage guide, ensured the criteria for my project are met before opening this issue, and understand that unmet criteria will result in the project's application being closed.
Krkn Incubation Application
v1.6 This template provides the project with a framework to inform the TOC of their conformance to the Incubation Level Criteria.
Project Repo(s): https://github.com/krkn-chaos/krkn Project Site: https://www.krkn-chaos.dev Sub-Projects:
Project points of contacts:
-
(Post Incubation only) Book a meeting with CNCF staff to understand project benefits and event resources.
Incubation Criteria Summary for Krkn
Application Level Assertion
- This project is currently Sandbox, accepted on 2023/12/19, and applying to Incubation.
- This project is applying to join the CNCF at the Incubation level.
Adoption Assertion
The project has been adopted by the following organizations in a testing and integration or production capacity:
| Organization | Since | Website | Use-Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| MarketAxess | 2024 | https://www.marketaxess.com/ | Kraken enables us to achieve our goal of increasing the reliability of our cloud products on Kubernetes. The tool allows us to automatically run various chaos scenarios, identify resilience and performance bottlenecks, and seamlessly restore the system to its original state once scenarios finish. These chaos scenarios include pod disruptions, node (EC2) outages, simulating availability zone (AZ) outages, and filling up storage spaces like EBS and EFS. The community is highly responsive to requests and works on expanding the tool's capabilities. MarketAxess actively contributes to the project, adding features such as the ability to leverage existing network ACLs and proposing several feature improvements to enhance test coverage. |
| Red Hat Openshift | 2020 | https://www.redhat.com/ | Kraken is a highly reliable chaos testing tool used to ensure the quality and resiliency of Red Hat Openshift. The engineering team runs all the test scenarios under Kraken on different cloud platforms on both self-managed and cloud services environments prior to the release of a new version of the product. The team also contributes to the Kraken project consistently which helps the test scenarios to keep up with the new features introduced to the product. Inclusion of this test coverage has contributed to gaining the trust of new and existing customers of the product. |
| IBM | 2023 | https://www.ibm.com/ | While working on AI for Chaos Testing at IBM Research, we closely collaborated with the Kraken (Krkn) team to advance intelligent chaos engineering. Our contributions included developing AI-enabled chaos injection strategies and integrating reinforcement learning (RL)-based fault search techniques into the Krkn tool, enabling it to identify and explore system vulnerabilities more efficiently. Kraken stands out as one of the most user-friendly and effective tools for chaos engineering, and the Kraken team’s deep technical involvement played a crucial role in the success of this collaboration—helping bridge cutting-edge AI research with practical, real-world system reliability testing. |
Application Process Principles
Suggested
N/A
Required
- Engage with the domain specific TAG(s) to increase awareness through a presentation or completing a General Technical Review.
- This was completed and occurred on DD-MMM-YYYY, and can be discovered at $LINK.
- All project metadata and resources are vendor-neutral.
- Review and acknowledgement of expectations for Sandbox projects and requirements for moving forward through the CNCF Maturity levels.
- Met during Project's application on DD-MMM-YYYY.
- Due Diligence Review.
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 the Project Reviews subproject.
Suggested
- 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.
- Clear and discoverable project governance documentation.
- 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).
- 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.
- A number of active maintainers which is appropriate to the size and scope of the project.
- Code and Doc ownership in Github and elsewhere matches documented governance roles.
- Document adoption and adherence to the CNCF Code of Conduct or the project's CoC which is based off the CNCF CoC and not in conflict with it.
- CNCF Code of Conduct is cross-linked from other governance documents.
- All subprojects, if any, are listed.
Contributors and Community
Note: this section may be augmented by the completion of a Governance Review from the Project Reviews subproject.
Suggested
- Contributor ladder with multiple roles for contributors.
Required
- Clearly defined and discoverable process to submit issues or changes.
- Project must have, and document, at least one public communications channel for users and/or contributors.
- 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.
- Up-to-date public meeting schedulers and/or integration with CNCF calendar.
- Documentation of how to contribute, with increasing detail as the project matures.
- Demonstrate contributor activity and recruitment.
Engineering Principles
Suggested
- Roadmap change process is documented.
- History of regular, quality releases.
Required
- 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.
- If applicable a General Technical Review was completed/updated on DD-MMM-YYYY, and can be discovered at $LINK.
- 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.
- If applicable a General Technical Review was completed/updated on DD-MMM-YYYY, and can be discovered at $LINK.
- Document the project's release process.
Security
Suggested
N/A
Required
Note: this section may be augmented by a joint-assessment performed by TAG Security and Compliance.
- Clearly defined and discoverable process to report security issues.
- Enforcing Access Control Rules to secure the code base against attacks (Example: two factor authentication enforcement, and/or use of ACL tools.)
- Document assignment of security response roles and how reports are handled.
- Document Security Self-Assessment.
- Achieve the Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) Best Practices passing badge.
Ecosystem
Suggested
N/A
Required
- Publicly documented list of adopters, which may indicate their adoption level (dev/trialing, prod, etc.)
- 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.