Merge pull request cncf#1263 from TheFoxAtWork/mltf-process-update

What: Replace broken PR cncf#1236 with correct files and links

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/template-graduation-application.md

@@ -0,0 +1,272 @@
+# $PROJECT Graduation Application
+v1.5
+This template provides the project with a framework to inform the TOC of their conformance to the Incubation Level Criteria. 
+
+
+Project Repo(s): $URL
+Project Site: $URL
+Sub-Projects: $LIST
+Communication: $SLACK
+
+Project points of contacts: $NAME, $EMAIL
+
+## Graduation Criteria Summary for $PROJECT
+
+### Adoption Assertion
+
+_The project has been adopted by the following organizations in a testing and integration or production capacity:_
+
+### Criteria
+
+## Application Process Principles
+
+### Suggested
+
+N/A
+
+### Required
+
+- [ ] **Give a presentation and engage with the domain specific TAG(s) to increase awareness**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **TAG provides insight/recommendation of the project in the context of the landscape**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **All project metadata and resources are [vendor-neutral](https://contribute.cncf.io/maintainers/community/vendor-neutrality/).**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Review and acknowledgement of expectations for graduated projects and requirements for moving forward through the CNCF Maturity levels.** 
+ - [ ] Met during Project's application on DD-MMM-YYYY.
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+Completion of this due diligence document, resolution of concerns raised, and presented for public comment satisifies 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.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+## Governance and Maintainers
+
+Note: this section may be augmented by the completion of a Governance Review from TAG Contributor Strategy.
+
+### 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.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+### Required
+
+- [ ] **Clear and discoverable project governance documentation.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Governance is up to date with actual project activities, including any meetings, elections, leadership, or approval processes.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Governance clearly documents [vendor-neutrality](https://contribute.cncf.io/maintainers/community/vendor-neutrality/) of project direction.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document how the project makes decisions on leadership roles, contribution acceptance, requests to the CNCF, and changes to governance or project goals.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document how role, function-based members, or sub-teams are assigned, onboarded, and removed for specific teams (example: Security Response Committee).**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document complete list of current maintainers, including names, contact information, domain of responsibility, and affiliation.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **A number of active maintainers which is appropriate to the size and scope of the project.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document a complete maintainer lifecycle process (including roles, onboarding, offboarding, and emeritus status).**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Demonstrate usage of the maintainer lifecycle with outcomes, either through the addition or replacement of maintainers as project events have required.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Project maintainers from at least 2 organizations that demonstrates survivability.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Code and Doc ownership in Github and elsewhere matches documented governance roles.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document agreement that project will adopt CNCF Code of Conduct.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **CNCF Code of Conduct is cross-linked from other governance documents.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) -->
+
+- [ ] **All subprojects, if any, are listed.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **If the project has subprojects: subproject leadership, contribution, maturity status documented, including add/remove process.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+## Contributors and Community
+
+Note: this section may be augmented by the completion of a Governance Review from TAG Contributor Strategy.
+
+### Suggested
+
+- [ ] **Contributor ladder with multiple roles for contributors.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+### Required
+
+- [ ] **Clearly defined and discoverable process to submit issues or changes.**
+
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Project must have, and document, at least one public communications channel for users and/or contributors.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **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.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Up-to-date public meeting schedulers and/or integration with CNCF calendar.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Documentation of how to contribute, with increasing detail as the project matures.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Demonstrate contributor activity and recruitment.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+## Engineering Principles
+
+- [ ] **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.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document what the project does, and why it does it - including viable cloud native use cases.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document and maintain a public roadmap or other forward looking planning document or tracking mechanism.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Roadmap change process is documented.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document overview of project architecture and software design that demonstrates viable cloud native use cases, as part of the project's documentation.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document the project's release process.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **History of regular, quality releases.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+## Security
+
+Note: this section may be augemented by a joint-assessment performed by TAG Security.
+
+### Suggested
+
+- [ ] **Achieving OpenSSF Best Practices silver or gold badge.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+### Required
+
+- [ ] **Clearly defined and discoverable process to report security issues.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Enforcing Access Control Rules to secure the code base against attacks (Example: two factor authentication enforcement, and/or use of ACL tools.)**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document assignment of security response roles and how reports are handled.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Document Security Self-Assessment.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Third Party Security Review.**
+
+ - [ ] Moderate and low findings from the Third Party Security Review are planned/tracked for resolution as well as overall thematic findings, such as: improving project contribution guide providing a PR review guide to look for memory leaks and other vulnerabilities the project may be susceptible to by design or language choice ensuring adequate test coverage on all PRs.
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **Achieve the Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) Best Practices passing badge.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+## Ecosystem
+
+### Suggested
+
+N/A
+
+### Required
+
+- [ ] **Publicly documented list of adopters, which may indicate their adoption level (dev/trialing, prod, etc.)**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+- [ ] **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)**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+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.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+Refer to the Adoption portion of this document.
+
+- [ ] **Clearly documented integrations and/or compatibility with other CNCF projects as well as non-CNCF projects.**
+
+<!-- (Project assertion goes here) --> 
+
+#### Adoption
+
+##### Adopter 1 - $COMPANY/$INDUSTRY
+
+_If the Adopting organization needs to remain anonymous, stating the industry vertical is sufficient._
+MONTH YEAR
+
+##### Adopter 2 - $COMPANY/$INDUSTRY
+
+_If the Adopting organization needs to remain anonymous, stating the industry vertical is sufficient._
+MONTH YEAR
+
+##### Adopter 3 - $COMPANY/$INDUSTRY
+
+_If the Adopting organization needs to remain anonymous, stating the industry vertical is sufficient._
+MONTH YEAR