Add charter and proposal for WG Workload Conformance by palnabarun · Pull Request #9139 · kubernetes/community

palnabarun · 2026-09-04T18:23:50Z

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

This PR follows up on the feedback threads on sig-apps@ and sig-architecture@, proposing a new Kubernetes Working Group: WG Workload Conformance.

What this PR does:

Adds the creation proposal (proposal.md) and charter (charter.md) for WG Workload Conformance, co-sponsored by SIG Apps and SIG Architecture. The group defines an open, objectively verifiable standard for how a workload should behave at runtime on Kubernetes and delivers the tooling that verifies it; running a certification program on top of the standard is explicitly out of scope and left to CNCF.

The specification and tooling live in a SIG Apps subproject from the outset and transition to a SIG Architecture subproject once they reach stability - keeping code ownership with a SIG throughout, never with the WG itself.

The proposed organizers were chosen deliberately for cross-landscape collaboration: the slate includes ISV representatives alongside platform/vendor organizers, so the group is shaped by the people who will actually run the conformance suite against their own workloads, not only by platform maintainers.

Detailed proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BGc4xVcrpQDEDVdGbj5DAvce_VRCSz9zRvQ-5FIdzrM/comment?tab=t.0

Notes for reviewer:

TBD: adding WG Workload Conformance to sigs.yaml and setting up OWNERS for the group/subproject. Deferred until this proposal and charter clear review and sponsorship is confirmed.

cc: @kubernetes/steering-committee @kubernetes/sig-apps-leads @kubernetes/sig-architecture-leads

/label committee/steering
/sig apps
/sig architecture
/kind documentation
/priority important-soon

kubernetes-prow · 2026-09-04T18:23:55Z

@palnabarun: The label(s) /label committee/steering , /label sig/apps , /label sig/architecture cannot be applied. These labels are supported: api-review, tide/merge-method-merge, tide/merge-method-rebase, tide/merge-method-squash, team/katacoda, refactor, ci-short, ci-extended, ci-full. Is this label configured under labels -> additional_labels or labels -> restricted_labels in plugin.yaml?

Details

In response to this:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

This PR follows up on the WG-Creation-Request thread sent to dev@kubernetes.io, and prior feedback threads on sig-apps@ and sig-architecture@, proposing a new Kubernetes Working Group: WG Workload Conformance.

What this PR does:

Adds the creation proposal (proposal.md) and charter (charter.md) for WG Workload Conformance, co-sponsored by SIG Apps and SIG Architecture. The group defines an open, objectively verifiable standard for how a workload should behave at runtime on Kubernetes and delivers the tooling that verifies it; running a certification program on top of the standard is explicitly out of scope and left to CNCF.

The specification and tooling live in a SIG Apps subproject from the outset and transition to a SIG Architecture subproject once they reach stability - keeping code ownership with a SIG throughout, never with the WG itself.

The proposed organizers were chosen deliberately for cross-landscape collaboration: the slate includes ISV representatives alongside platform/vendor organizers, so the group is shaped by the people who will actually run the conformance suite against their own workloads, not only by platform maintainers.

Detailed proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BGc4xVcrpQDEDVdGbj5DAvce_VRCSz9zRvQ-5FIdzrM/comment?tab=t.0

Notes for reviewer:

TBD: adding WG Workload Conformance to sigs.yaml and setting up OWNERS for the group/subproject. Deferred until this proposal and charter clear review and sponsorship is confirmed.

cc: @kubernetes/steering-committee @kubernetes/sig-apps-leads @kubernetes/sig-architecture-leads

/label committee/steering
/label sig/apps
/label sig/architecture
/kind documentation
/priority important-soon

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

kubernetes-prow · 2026-09-04T18:23:57Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: palnabarun

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [palnabarun]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

palnabarun · 2026-09-04T18:24:37Z

/sig apps
/sig architecture

palnabarun · 2026-09-04T18:26:47Z

/hold for steering consensus

(putting this explicit hold to avoid accidental merge)

palnabarun · 2026-09-04T18:27:25Z

+
+### Stakeholder SIGs
+
+- SIG Apps


cc: @soltysh @janetkuo @kow3ns

palnabarun · 2026-09-04T18:27:38Z

+### Stakeholder SIGs
+
+- SIG Apps
+- SIG Architecture


cc: @dims @derekwaynecarr @johnbelamaric

spron-in · 2026-09-08T11:36:28Z

Love this initiative. It can help to improve the quality of the whole ecosystem.
It should have gradual rollout though to see if "good citizens" can pass it.

soltysh · 2026-09-08T12:00:46Z

@@ -0,0 +1,239 @@
+# WG Workload Conformance - Creation Proposal


I don't think we need this other document. It's fine to link the google doc in the charter, and eventually move some of the bits there.

I kept it separate because wg-governance.md requires the creation proposal to explicitly answer a fixed set of questions (problem statement, deliverable, disband criteria, stakeholder SIGs, meeting mechanics, diversity, etc.), and sig-wg-lifecycle.md's checklist expects that too.

Yes, charter.md is meant to stay the durable, minimal doc. I added proposal.md is where I am answering those specific questions so reviewers can know a papertrail of the context.

For now I'd rather keep it so the creation request has that trail and eventually move things to the charter. wdyt?

nataliesea · 2026-09-16T22:10:42Z

Woohoo! I'm joining!

JimBugwadia · 2026-09-18T22:24:37Z

This is great! Thanks for championing this @palnabarun and team. Managing application workload conformance and best practices has been a core pain point for our customers and the Kyverno community. Excited to participate and happy to support from Nirmata.

dims · 2026-09-20T23:51:04Z

+Apps decides whether to mothball or archive the working group and its
+artifacts. No certification program on top of the standard gets created
+until after SIG Architecture has approved the specification and tooling and
+converted it into a subproject; running that program is out of scope for


SIG Architecture is likely to create a sub project like the existing conformance and ai-conformance

This subproject will need to be staffed as well and will have to continue the work

Work would include updating the Requirements AND the Tests to newer kubernetes versions for example

The sub project will have to work with CNCF and help with questions/concerns from end users who try to run the tests or troubles with their workloads.

not sure how much of this you want to add to summary, but leaving this comment here so the expectations are clear.

I've added the parts which were missing to the end of this sentence.

Adds the creation proposal and charter for the new WG Workload Conformance, co-sponsored by SIG Apps and SIG Architecture, to define an objective, verifiable standard for workload runtime behavior on Kubernetes and the tooling that verifies it. Specification and tooling live in a SIG Apps subproject from the outset, transitioning to SIG Architecture once stable; the WG itself owns no code. Signed-off-by: Nabarun Pal <pal.nabarun95@gmail.com>

kubernetes-prow Bot added kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. labels Sep 4, 2026

kubernetes-prow Bot requested review from mrbobbytables and soltysh September 4, 2026 18:23

kubernetes-prow Bot added sig/apps Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Apps. sig/architecture Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Architecture. labels Sep 4, 2026

palnabarun force-pushed the wg-workload-conformance/init branch from 080b464 to eabc661 Compare September 4, 2026 18:26

kubernetes-prow Bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 4, 2026

palnabarun commented Sep 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

soltysh reviewed Sep 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

palnabarun force-pushed the wg-workload-conformance/init branch 3 times, most recently from 2ac1183 to 216a7e3 Compare September 10, 2026 09:58

dims reviewed Sep 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

palnabarun force-pushed the wg-workload-conformance/init branch from 216a7e3 to 5947914 Compare September 21, 2026 07:18

		@@ -0,0 +1,239 @@
		# WG Workload Conformance - Creation Proposal

Conversation

palnabarun commented Sep 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

kubernetes-prow Bot commented Sep 4, 2026

Uh oh!

kubernetes-prow Bot commented Sep 4, 2026

Uh oh!

palnabarun commented Sep 4, 2026

Uh oh!

palnabarun commented Sep 4, 2026

Uh oh!

palnabarun Sep 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

palnabarun Sep 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

spron-in commented Sep 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

soltysh Sep 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

palnabarun Sep 10, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nataliesea commented Sep 16, 2026

Uh oh!

JimBugwadia commented Sep 18, 2026

Uh oh!

dims Sep 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dims Sep 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

palnabarun Sep 21, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

palnabarun commented Sep 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading

spron-in commented Sep 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading