break
        for reviewer in pr_reviewers:
            reviewers[reviewer] += 1
        if pr.state == "MERGED" and pr.author:
            contributors[pr.author.login] += 1
    return ContributorsResults(
        contributors=contributors,
        commenters=commenters,
        reviewers=reviewers,
        translation_reviewers=translation_reviewers,
        authors=authors,

    - enj
    - mikedanese
  sig-cli-api-reviewers:
    - pwittrock
    - soltysh
  sig-cloud-provider-api-reviewers:
    - andrewsykim
    - cheftako
    - dims
  # sig-cluster-lifecycle-api-reviewers:
  #   -
  #   -
  sig-contributor-experience-approvers:
    - mrbobbytables
    - cblecker
    - nikhita
    - palnabarun
    - kaslin
    - MadhavJivrajani
    - Priyankasaggu11929

**2. Valid?**

-   If the PR passes all the quality checks then we go ahead and assign a
    reviewer.
-   If the PR didn't meet the validation criteria, we request for additional
    changes to be made to PR to pass quality checks and send it back or on a
    rare occasion we may reject it.

**3. Review**

-   For a valid PR, reviewer (person familiar with the code/functionality)
    checks if the PR looks good or needs additional changes.

cat <<__EOF__ > "vendor/OWNERS"
# See the OWNERS docs at https://go.k8s.io/owners

options:
  # make root approval non-recursive
  no_parent_owners: true
approvers:
- dep-approvers
reviewers:
- dep-reviewers
__EOF__

#   passed.
# - golangci-strict.yaml adds checks that all new code in pull requests
#   must pass.
# - golangci-hints.yaml adds checks for code patterns where developer
#   and reviewer may decide whether findings should get addressed before
#   merging. Beware that the golangci-lint output includes also the
#   issues that must be fixed and doesn't indicate how severe each issue

![star](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2920003/86032538-212ff900-ba55-11ea-9492-d4bc90656a02.png)

**Note**: If everything works as mentioned above, request a new official set of images be built and pushed from the reviewer, and add another commit to the original PR with the version changes.

//   This, often times, requires that the PR that introduces such new fields to touch kubeadm test code.
//   Doing so, requires more work on the part of developers and reviewers. When kubeadm moves out of k/k
//   this would allow for more sporadic breaks in kubeadm tests as PRs that merge in k/k and introduce
//   new fields won't be able to fix the tests in kubeadm.

              <img class="h-16 w-16 rounded-full bg-gray-50" src="/static/img/izzy.png" alt="Izzy">
  
              <div class="text-sm leading-6">
                <div class="font-semibold text-gray-900">{{ review.reviewer }}</div>
                <div class="mt-0.5 text-gray-600 font-mono">Reviews served by: 
                  {{ reviews.podname }}
                  {% if reviews.clustername != "null" %}

// That standard is not freely available, which is a problem in an open source
// implementation, because not only the implementer, but also any maintainer,
// contributor, reviewer, auditor, and learner needs access to it. Instead, this
// package references and follows the equivalent [SEC 1, Version 2.0].
//
// [FIPS 186-4]: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/NIST.FIPS.186-4.pdf

// constant time.
//
// Variable and function names, as well as code layout, are selected to
// facilitate reviewing the implementation against the NIST FIPS 203 ipd
// document.
//
// Reviewers unfamiliar with polynomials or linear algebra might find the
// background at https://words.filippo.io/kyber-math/ useful.

import (
	"crypto/rand"
	"crypto/subtle"
	"errors"
	"internal/byteorder"