Update wgs.yaml

[juliusvonkohout]

@andreyvelich @kimwnasptd
based on #871 (comment)

[google-oss-prow]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from juliusvonkohout. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[andreyvelich]

But we should have a charter/vote to establish this working group defined, as we started in: #837
Since CNCF will review our governance structure for graduation, we should keep our working group names consistent everywhere.

cc @kubeflow/kubeflow-steering-committee

[juliusvonkohout]

But we should have a charter/vote to establish this working group defined, as we started in: #837 Since CNCF will review our governance structure for graduation, we should keep our working group names consistent everywhere.

cc @kubeflow/kubeflow-steering-committee

It is more renaming the existing one. So should we vote here ? @kubeflow/kubeflow-steering-committee

[andreyvelich]

It is more renaming the existing one. So should we vote here ?

We can definitely discuss it with KSC, but I suggest that we rename/create/change WGs after we graduate with CNCF.
We need to make sure that our WG names are consistent, since CNCF will review it: https://www.kubeflow.org/docs/about/community/#kubeflow-working-groups

As of now, we have 6 WGs + WG ML Experience + WG Data.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[juliusvonkohout]

not stale