Date   

[VOTE] Kubernetes moving to graduation

Chris Aniszczyk
 

After last week's TOC call, we decided to start moving forward with graduation reviews. Kubernetes was the project that motivated the creation of the CNCF, and was its first (seed) project. It has sustained a fast pace of growth of contributors, contributing organizations, and users, and now operates at massive scale. The project's governance and community-management practices continue to evolve and mature as the project grows, but the Kubernetes Steering Committee (https://github.com/kubernetes/steering) unanimously believes that Kubernetes fulfills all the CNCF incubating and graduation criteria:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: https://kubernetes.io/case-studies
- Have a healthy number of committers: Kubernetes is so large, with thousands of contributors and nearly 100 repositories, that we had to develop our own mechanism to manage approval permissions. We have hundreds of approvers, listed in more than 4000 OWNERS files across the project (https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=org%3Akubernetes+filename%3AOWNERS&type=Code)
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: Devstats shows that we have thousands of PRs merged per month (https://k8s.devstats.cncf.io/)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/91

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


[RESULT] CoreDNS moving to incubation (PASSED)

Chris Aniszczyk
 

CoreDNS is now an incubating project at CNCF, here are the results:

+1 binding TOC votes (6/9)

+1 non-binding community votes:
- Kapil Thangavelu: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/1707

Thank you to everyone who voted.

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Daniel Bryant
 

+1 (non-binding)

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:57 AM, Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719



Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Mark Peek
 

+1 non-binding

 

From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>
Date: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 8:57 AM
To: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

 

At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

 

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

 

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

 

--

Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Mark Coleman <mark@...>
 

+ 1 non-binding

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 2:30 PM Nick Chase <nchase@...> wrote:
+1 non-binding

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018, Sam Lambert <samlambert@...> wrote:
+1 binding

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:55 PM, Jonathan Boulle <jon@...> wrote:
+1 binding 

Am 20.02.2018 23:53 schrieb "Ken Owens" <kenchristineowens@...>:
+1 Binding 

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018, 10:57 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


--
+31 652134960
Marketing Chair www.cncf.io


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Nick Chase
 

+1 non-binding


On Wednesday, February 21, 2018, Sam Lambert <samlambert@...> wrote:
+1 binding

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:55 PM, Jonathan Boulle <jon@...> wrote:
+1 binding 

Am 20.02.2018 23:53 schrieb "Ken Owens" <kenchristineowens@...>:
+1 Binding 

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018, 10:57 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...g> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719



Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Sam Lambert <samlambert@...>
 

+1 binding

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:55 PM, Jonathan Boulle <jon@...> wrote:
+1 binding 

Am 20.02.2018 23:53 schrieb "Ken Owens" <kenchristineowens@...>:
+1 Binding 

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018, 10:57 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...g> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719



Re: Final RFC: CNCF Sandbox

Stephen Watt
 

Thanks Chris. Firstly, I think the way the sandbox doc is articulated in the doc is great. However, I imagine sandbox projects should be aware of the TLP graduation criteria and trying to steer their ship towards those goals, and as such, it prompted a broader meta question that I thought might be better suited to the TOC list, rather than a comment on the doc. 

When I look at the graduation criteria from Sandbox -> Incubation -> Graduated, I see in the criteria for "graduated" that one needs to have committers from at least 2 organizations. This hints at a desire for CNCF projects to have some measure of open governance but stops short of calling it out directly. Why not do so?

I believe I've heard it stated by the TOC before that you don't want to preclude healthy important projects where the vast majority of committers happen to be from one organization. I agree. However, I don't think that is at odds with an open governance model. For example, you could have an open governance model where it just so happened to be, that the participation in the project is all from a single company, however, because of the governance model, should contributors join later from other companies, they would have a path to equal influence in the project decision making and contributions being committed.

Why am I bringing this up? An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. I believe the advantage of calling open gov out explicitly in the graduation criteria helps avoid a future scenario where a CNCF project is governed by a cabal largely dominated by one company, that has a token committer from outside, that actively or passively ignores contributions from the community (the incentives can differ from project to project). I suspect you have come across github projects with open source licenses that behave this way. Projects like this are bad for the project's and foundation's brand.  The ASF had to deal with this issue a number of times with popular projects in their Big Data stack. It was painful, but they were able to deal with it because they are prescriptive about how ASF projects are to be governed. I realize this can be a slippery slope because the next step would be to become prescriptive about what type(s) of open governance model CNCF projects would deem acceptable. However, perhaps something worth anticipating and discussing.

Regards
Steve Watt

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 12:06 PM, Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
At today's TOC call there was consensus on the CNCF Sandbox proposal is close to being ready for a formal vote. We will leave the document open for any community comments for a week and do a formal vote next week: https://goo.gl/gZhBjY

After the vote and assuming the sandbox is approved, we will resume voting on new project proposals (existing inception proposals will be slotted for the sandbox). 

Thanks.

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719



Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Jonathan Boulle <jon@...>
 

+1 binding 

Am 20.02.2018 23:53 schrieb "Ken Owens" <kenchristineowens@...>:

+1 Binding 

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018, 10:57 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


making final changes to the Sandbox doc

alexis richardson
 

Hi all

This is a further reminder to speak up on the list or in the Sandbox
doc, if you have concerns about the content, tone or emphasis. I'd
like to attempt any redrafting of passages early next week, with
Chris, based on your feedback.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MkuVT7Q6itn9ESW-iyqIXsEqTPBrStXlvzESg94933A/edit?ts=5a7c49ae

Eg: There was discussion on the call yesterday about how we encourage
projects into the Sandbox as the preferred path, and ensuring that it
is perceived as such. This needs clarifying (I think Brian took the
action to have a go).

a


nomination

Erin Boyd
 

Hello TOC,
I am wishing to be nominated for the open seat on the TOC board. Alexis and Chris asked I reach out to the board to request one of you nominate me.

A little about me:

I currently am a Principle Engineer for Red Hat working in the Office of Technology. I have been with Red Hat for 5 years. I am a Kubernetes contributor and an Apache Ambari committer. I am an active contributor to the Kubernetes Storage SIG, which my most recent feature to enable raw block devices was released in 1.9. Prior to working at Red Hat, I worked at IBM for 14 years. I worked in embedded systems development for several years before moving into global enterprise level services. I thorough enjoy working in Open Source and built a successful product at IBM based on Open Source technologies that still makes IBM millions of dollars each year.
I live outside of Bozeman, MT with my husband and 5 children, 1 dog, 3 cats and 15 chickens. I am a robot enthusiast and FIRST robotics mentor. I also own a Karate studio and volunteer a considerable amount of time to teaching and empowering women and children. And in what spare time I have, I run marathons.

Thank you for your consideration!
Erin


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Ken Owens
 

+1 Binding 


On Tue, Feb 20, 2018, 10:57 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Thangavelu, Kapil
 

+1 non-binding


From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Benjamin Hindman <benh@...>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 4:09:35 PM
To: cncf-toc@...
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation
 
+1 binding


On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:57 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719

--
Benjamin Hindman
Founder of Mesosphere and Co-Creator of Apache Mesos

Follow us on Twitter: @mesosphere

Follow Us Twitter LinkedIn Facebook YouTube
 


The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The information transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer.


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Benjamin Hindman
 

+1 binding


On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:57 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719

--
Benjamin Hindman
Founder of Mesosphere and Co-Creator of Apache Mesos

Follow us on Twitter: @mesosphere

Follow Us Twitter LinkedIn Facebook YouTube
 


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Gou Rao <grao@...>
 

+1 non binding

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 9:03 AM, alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
+1 binding


On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 5:02 PM, John Belamaric <jbelamaric@...> wrote:
> +1 non-binding
>
> On Feb 20, 2018, at 11:57 AM, Chris Aniszczyk
> <caniszczyk@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception
> project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the
> project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the
> incubation criteria requirements:
>
> - Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of
> sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may
> be discussed privately
> - Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different
> companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the
> main repository
> - Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged
> contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on
> the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors
> other than Miek and Infoblox)
>
> Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation
> proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66
>
> Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate
> non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
>
> --
> Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
>
>
>





Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Bassam Tabbara <bassam@...>
 

+1 (non-binding)

On Feb 20, 2018, at 8:57 AM, Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:

At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Brian Grant
 

+1 binding

It's also worth noting that CoreDNS announced its 1.0 release last year.

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719



Re: RexRay follow up

Kitson, Clinton <clinton.kitson@...>
 


Correct Brian, REX-Ray should be transparent to end users in this space and provides an important service by helping connect apps to storage. Operators of clusters are the ones that should be very aware of it as it would provide trusted and more quality plugins that are built on top of the existing CSI spec. 

REX-Ray stats: Recently REX-Ray went through some refactoring to accommodate the CSI architecture changes that needed to take place. This meant rolling in the libStorage functionality which unfortunately skews the numbers a bit. The {code} team has been primary maintainers on the framework where collaborators have mainly focused on building drivers. Other storage companies who understand the complexity involved in building a solid CSI implementation see the value and commonality that can be addressed by REX-Ray and are interested in collaborating if supported via a foundation.

Production users: Yes, REX-Ray is being used in production by some of the users listed in the slides. Up to this point, usage levels have been tied closely to production deployment of Mesos & Docker.

Sandbox: I believe the numbers and history justify incubation, but we can discuss it.

Control plane: REX-Ray used to have its own control plane (libStorage API) prior to CSI. In most recent we have made architectural changes to be adhere to CSI.  When libStorage was its control-plane, there was integration work performed to make libStorage a volume plugin and additionally to Cloud Foundry. Today, anyone who implements CSI on the cluster orchestrator side can talk with any REX-Ray plugin.

Data plane: REX-Ray is not involved in the data-plane of storage operations. It is an orchestrator and simply gets two components (local/remote storage & an OS) connected. It essentially performs the exact same steps that someone would manually perform to get these two components communicating and the reverse on tear down.

Persistent state: It is completely stateless today. 




Clint Kitson
Technical Director for {code}
CNCF Governing Board Member
--- 
email: Clinton.Kitson@...
mobile: "+1 424 645 4116"
team: theCodeTeam.com
twitter: "@clintkitson"
github: github.com/clintkitson


Re: [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

Quinton Hoole
 

+1 (non-binding).

From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Justin Garrison <justinleegarrison@...>
Date: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 09:26
To: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] CoreDNS moving to incubation

​+1 non-binding​



--
Justin Garrison
justingarrison.com

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Mark Interrante <minterrante@...> wrote:
+1 non-binding

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Ihor Dvoretskyi <ihor.dvoretskyi@...> wrote:
+1 non-binding

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...g> wrote:
At today's TOC call, we had the CoreDNS team perform their annual inception project review and request to move to the incubation level. You can see the project statistics here: https://coredns.devstats.cncf.io and they meet the incubation criteria requirements:

- Used successfully in production by at least three independent end users of sufficient scale and quality: seven listed in the ADOPTERS file, others may be discussed privately
- Have a healthy number of committers: six maintainers from four different companies (Google, Infoblox, Apprenda, Independent). 71 contributors in the main repository
- Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: 12+ releases since joining CNCF, 489+ commits/merged PRs on the main repository since joining CNCF (81+ of those PRs are from authors other than Miek and Infoblox)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full incubation proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/66

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719





--
Mark Interrante
SVP Infrastructure Engineering | Salesforce


--
-



Election Schedule for 2 TOC-selected Seats

Chris Aniszczyk
 

On today's TOC call, we discussed that we have two TOC-selected seats opening up for the TOC (https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/election-schedule.md), the schedule is below:

2/20/2018: Nominations open up today (nominations by TOC members only)
3/6/2018: Nominations close EOD PT
3/7/2018: Voting begins
3/14/2018: Voting ends EOD PT
3/15/2018: Announce results

They key word here is TOC-selected (the charter empowers the TOC to select two members on their own) so an existing TOC member needs to nominate you. Please reach out to a TOC member (https://github.com/cncf/toc#members) and have them nominate you by shooting me a note.

Thanks!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719

5621 - 5640 of 7339