Umbrella issue for Netlify access amendments

[divya-mohan0209]

Discussed in k/website discussion and RT 1.26 retro

• One member from CNCF's Dev Advocate/Tech writer team to have access to K8s Netlify
• Netlify access cleanup for emeritus co-chairs/tech leads
• Netlify access cleanup for other non-Docs accounts
• RT Docs lead Netlify access

Proposal:

• [x] Since no sub-teams within Netlify give elevated privileges, the CNCF Dev Advocate/Tech Writer will be added individually as a collaborator.

• [x] #41199

• [x] Separate onboarding and offboarding documentation for co-chairs & leads to be created toward including this access.

- [ ] For non-docs accounts, for example, RT Docs, Emeritus Steering, etc., access is to be removed after consultation with SIG Contribex.

• [x] Per Netlify documentation, a collaborator role allows the actions required for the Release team Docs lead to perform the necessary actions on a release without causing any damage. If in agreement, document explicitly in the role handbook to seek Netlify collaborator access from the Docs leads.

• [x] Document in k/community whoever has owner access to Netlify.

Edit: Raised an issue with SIG Contribex for non-docs accounts under this issue. We will be following up further on the issue and in Slack.

[palnabarun]

+1 on the overall cleanup.

---

(With the hat of a GitHub Admin)

Would our access be removed? Asking since we get requests to enable subproject sites (*.sigs.k8s.io) on kubernetes/org and we handle those requests.

[palnabarun]

On that note, can a list be maintained in k/community on who has Owner access to Netlify? This can keep the membership transparent to everyone.

[palnabarun]

/triage accepted

[divya-mohan0209]

+1 on the overall cleanup.

(With the hat of a GitHub Admin)

Would our access be removed? Asking since we get requests to enable subproject sites (*.sigs.k8s.io) on kubernetes/org and we handle those requests.

Nope. For the current cleanup, we'll be manually cross-checking and figuring out the retention. But the aim is to have an updated Netlify members list by end of Q1 (hopefully) & a way to, potentially, automate it.

[divya-mohan0209]

On that note, can a list be maintained in k/community on who has Owner access to Netlify? This can keep the membership transparent to everyone.

Agreed!

[a-mccarthy]

+1 to moving forward with this. @chalin and @nate-double-u have both raised Netlify access as issues/blockers for ongoing CNCF projects, like out Google analytics 4 migration (issue: https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/35299).

[divya-mohan0209]

Amending the description format to a checklist of items that will be completed after the consensus date i.e. February 8th.

[nate-double-u]

One member from CNCF's Dev Advocate/Tech writer team to have access to K8s Netlify

Is it too late to ask for 2 members from CNCF's Dev Advocate/Tech writer team to have access? Would be good for vacation coverage and whatnot.

[divya-mohan0209]

Closing this issue off as the audit work + associated documentation for SIG Docs has been completed. For non-docs accounts on Netlify, we have raised it with SIG Contribex and will be following it up there.

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@divya-mohan0209: Closing this issue.

In response to [this](https://github.com/kubernetes/website/issues/38839#issuecomment-1876208409): >Closing this issue off as the audit work + associated documentation for SIG Docs has been completed. For non-docs accounts on Netlify, we have raised it with SIG Contribex and will be following it up there. > >/close Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [kubernetes/test-infra](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/issues/new?title=Prow%20issue:) repository.