On Jul 19, 2017, at 5:26 AM, Richard Hartmann <richih@...> wrote:

Yes, carefully increasing participation is good. At the current stage,
I wouldn't want to be an artificial blocker in selection as I don't
know most people (yet), anyway. "Does this person have relevant
knowledge/experience and will they contribute positively" is the only
hard consideration at this point. We are currently seeing some
bikeshedding and feature creep; while that's always expected,
overloading discussions is my main concern, atm.

The Google people are networking and stackdriver with some
Borgmon/Monarch experience mixed in; Fabian said he will toss the repo
address and purpose into his k8s sig, but I didn't follow up on that
and/or verify, yet. I shall do so, but Fabian's on holiday atm.


Given the holiday season, these issues will collect and simmer for at
least a few weeks before I will make a call for Rough Consensus.


Richard

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Alexis Richardson <alexis@...> wrote:

+stuart+brian fyi


Richard

IMO this planning process would benefit from *slightly* wider CNCF-TOC
involvement. Do you want to select & invite people or ask Ken & Lee to do
so?

BTW, are the google reps in your notes also from the k8s instrumentation
sig?

a





On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Richard Hartmann <richih@...> wrote:

Hi Chris,

sorry for being so late in replying. We didn't have the July 4th call
for obvious reasons, but we had our call just now; even if quite a few
people are on holiday.

The GDoc is still

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q7HSZyRv4Ay4hTlva4uy8WPh5WlYv9S0Yy-xQS2vKo4/edit#
but I am splitting out most questions into
https://github.com/RichiH/OpenMetrics/issues so we have better
exposure and tracking for those questions. Again, if you want to
bounce these discussion to carefully hand-chosen people, you are more
than welcome to do so. Part of my intention behind the issues is to
get out of the echo chamber if whoever hapens to be in a particular
call.


Richard