Date   

RFC: Strimzi

Chris Aniszczyk
 

Hey all, we heard from the Strimzi project today:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues/138

There were questions about if the ZK aspects of the operator could be
pulled out as its own project. There were also other questions around
other kafka operators in the ecosystem.

Anyways, the Strimzi project is looking for TOC sponsors for the sandbox.

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


Re: RFC: Keycloak project presentation

boleslaw.dawidowicz@gmail.com
 

There is nothing RHT enterprise specific and it is backed fully by
proven upstream technologies with active communities.

Regarding clustering and concerns expressed in the chat there is a way
to configure clustering on Kubernetes. We have people in the commnity
running deployments like that. Same for cross site replication.

If there is need to address more specific questions or perform a a
deeper dive we would be happy to do so.

Would like to thank for the opportunity to present the project to the
TOC today.

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 5:47 PM Chris Aniszczyk
<caniszczyk@...> wrote:

The Keycloak project presented today:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/176

The TOC, especially Joe had some questions on how Keycloak was
deployed on Wildfly (vs the RHT enterprise version of that). This
project is also fairly high up the stack compared to what we normally
accept in CNCF imho. We also didn't have a full roster of TOC members
so I'd like to ensure we have a wide set of eyes on this topic.

Jeff was also interested in being one of the sponsors for the sandbox
potentially.

Anyways, wanted to move the discussion to the mailing list.

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



RFC: Keycloak project presentation

Chris Aniszczyk
 

The Keycloak project presented today:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/176

The TOC, especially Joe had some questions on how Keycloak was
deployed on Wildfly (vs the RHT enterprise version of that). This
project is also fairly high up the stack compared to what we normally
accept in CNCF imho. We also didn't have a full roster of TOC members
so I'd like to ensure we have a wide set of eyes on this topic.

Jeff was also interested in being one of the sponsors for the sandbox
potentially.

Anyways, wanted to move the discussion to the mailing list.

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


Re: thought leadership

Vineet Gupta
 

Hello All,

I would like to second Erin’s idea for CNCF role in telco softwares, they are majorly driven towards NFV base deployments . Since I am coming from telco security companies a large transformation is happening in telcos to move towards what’s been done in Airship project and some other proprietary softwares in NFV space . As carriers we are looking to have a technical direction from CNCF which collaborated with what has been done in OPNFV space so far and how cloud native projects can be well integrated in OPNFV stack seamlessly . 

Almost all the efforts in telcos this year is  directed towards building up products which conforms to the security and edge deployment focused. So it would be great to have some CNCF landscape project to directly integrate with MANO and NFVI in plugins and extension point to integrate.

Not sure if there would be anything in KubeCon  Barcelona for the same but I would appreciate thoughts and guidance here from members.

Thanks much


On Sat 23 Mar 2019 at 19:45, Sarah Allen <sarah@...> wrote:

The CNCF is being looked to as a thought leader, and as I read the mission statement it seems to clearly evoke a strong leadership role “fostering and sustaining an ecosystem.”  I like Liz’s framing of the CNCF thought leadership roles as “curating, not inventing.”


To address the specific questions on security, I want to highlight some of the work of the SAFE WG, which provides a foundation for the kind of resources that I believe will be useful to executives who are making decisions about cloud native technologies and would like to understand security implications.


Published resources based on initial vision and charter:


Other in-progress resources:


We recently prioritized the security white paper, now that it is a bit more clear the audience and purpose of that resource.  We appreciate that the CNCF and the Linux Foundation is supporting this effort and look forward to collaborating with Jessica Wilkerson, Linux Foundation Cybersecurity Research Director on that effort.  


Thank you,

Sarah Allen

SAFE WG, co-chair


p.s. I completely agree on the need for more guidance on compliance (HIPAA, GDPR have come up a lot in discussions, and my hope is that the current work on shared terminology and categorization the existing technologies and common approaches for enforcement, verification, auditing, explainability, etc. will serve as a solid foundational for additional resources.)




On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 12:17 PM Doug Davis <dug@...> wrote:

Yup. I kind of like what we did in the Serverless WG. We produced a whitepaper and landscape doc to help people understand what serverless is all about, what's going on in the community, what's out there for people to use (OSS vs proprietary), etc... There was a little bit of opinion mixed in, but I think it was based on experience and the general direction we were seeing the community go. Or it was more like talking about design patterns that were emerging, and when they might be appropriate. It definitely was not playing "king maker" or telling people to use one product over another.

More about education than anything else so they can make an informed decision.


thanks
-Doug
_______________________________________________________
STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Architecture & Technology
(919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@...
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog

"Matt Farina" ---03/22/2019 02:10:22 PM---When I was writing the SIG Responsibilities I added a bullet under the end user education section th

From: "Matt Farina" <matt@...>
To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Date: 03/22/2019 02:10 PM
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] thought leadership
Sent by: cncf-toc@...





When I was writing the SIG Responsibilities I added a bullet under the end user education section that reads:
      White papers, presentations, videos, or other forms of training clarifying terminology, comparisons of different approaches, available projects or products, common or recommended practises, trends, illustrative successes and failures, etc.

I don’t know if I would call this “thought leadership” in the typical sense. The idea was to consolidate and clearly communicate what is going on. To share how people are solving their problems and what it does for them.

When it comes to being opinionated on how people should do things, I tend to be a bit reserved there. Different people have different needs and there is no one size fits all. And, a lot of the talk is from infrastructure folks who have different practices, goals, and cultures from the app devs running the applications. Then there is the difference between highly regulated businesses and many of the startups trying things out. There are many dimensions to differences which makes it hard to give too many recommendations on how people should do things.

--
Matt Farina

mattfarina.com







Agenda for 4/9/2019 TOC Meeting

Chris Aniszczyk
 

Hey all, we are meeting tomorrow, focused on community presentations
to catch up on the CNCF community presentation backlog:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1bijEpuwaaa6jR1D5PAjyW731-j6Xc1TFHJuUh_FwwK8/edit#slide=id.g25ca91f87f_0_0
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jpoKT12jf2jTf-2EJSAl4iTdA7Aoj_uiI19qIaECNFc/edit#

We will be hearing from the NSM, Keycloak and Strimzi communities.

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


[RESULT] CRI-O project proposal (incubation)

Chris Aniszczyk
 


Re: [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

Gilbert Song
 

+1 (non-binding)

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 9:35 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
fluentd has requested to move to the graduation maturity level:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

Brian Grant from the TOC has performed due diligence and called the vote:
https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3089
https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/54/project-health?orgId=1&var-repogroup_name=Fluentd

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal
located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

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] fluentd moving to graduation

Brewer, Jeff
 

+1 binding

 

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> On Behalf Of Michelle Noorali via Lists.Cncf.Io
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 5:39 PM
To: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>; mrausch@...
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

 

This email is from an external sender.

 

+1 binding


From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Rausch, Matt via Lists.Cncf.Io <mrausch=nipr.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 4:07 PM
To: Chris Aniszczyk; CNCF TOC
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

 

+1 (non-binding)

 

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> On Behalf Of Yash Thakkar
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 1:52 PM
To: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

 

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

+1 (non-binding)

 

On Tue 2 Apr, 2019, 10:52 PM Chiradeep Vittal, <chiradeep.vittal@...> wrote:

+1 (nb)

On 3/29/19, 9:35 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of caniszczyk@...> wrote:

    fluentd has requested to move to the graduation maturity level:
    https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

    Brian Grant from the TOC has performed due diligence and called the vote:
    https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3089
    https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/54/project-health?orgId=1&var-repogroup_name=Fluentd

    Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal
    located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

    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






----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any attachments are from the NIPR and are intended only for the addressee. Information contained herein is confidential, and may be privileged or exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable federal or state law. This message is not intended as a waiver of the confidential, privileged or exempted status of the information transmitted. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution or use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error.


Re: [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

Michelle Noorali
 

+1 binding

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Rausch, Matt via Lists.Cncf.Io <mrausch=nipr.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 4:07 PM
To: Chris Aniszczyk; CNCF TOC
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation
 

+1 (non-binding)

 

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> On Behalf Of Yash Thakkar
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 1:52 PM
To: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

 

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

+1 (non-binding)

 

On Tue 2 Apr, 2019, 10:52 PM Chiradeep Vittal, <chiradeep.vittal@...> wrote:

+1 (nb)

On 3/29/19, 9:35 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of caniszczyk@...> wrote:

    fluentd has requested to move to the graduation maturity level:
    https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

    Brian Grant from the TOC has performed due diligence and called the vote:
    https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3089
    https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/54/project-health?orgId=1&var-repogroup_name=Fluentd

    Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal
    located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

    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







----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any attachments are from the NIPR and are intended only for the addressee. Information contained herein is confidential, and may be privileged or exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable federal or state law. This message is not intended as a waiver of the confidential, privileged or exempted status of the information transmitted. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution or use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error.


Re: [Policy][Security]Long Term Research Collaboration

Zhipeng Huang
 

Like finding the right team from universities that we could collaborate with, many even funding at certain level if needed ? Basically we need a communication channel and a defined mechanism for collaboration. 

Definitely could be sponsored as part of the governance/security sig effort :) 

On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:34 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
Could this work be done under the new Governance/Security SIG forming?

I'm not sure what the specific ask is here outside of a place to
collaborate / meet maybe?

On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 7:27 PM Zhipeng Huang <zhipengh512@...> wrote:
>
> Hi TOC members,
>
> In today's Policy WG's meeting[0] we discussed the possibility of introducing formal verification into the cloud native world in conjunction with policy engine, to form a complete cloud native policy architecture. However formal verification is not a subtle work and requires significant work on theoretic side. I'm wondering is there any mechanism within CNCF that we could do long term research collaboration ?
>
> We believe this will hugely benefit Kubernetes, Istio and many other cloud native platforms in general to have formal verification capability. Other research topics could include things like security protocol building (e.g. noise framework) which would be also quite interesting.
>
> [0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ihFfEfgViKlUMbY2NKxaJzBkgHh-Phk5hqKTzK-NEEs/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> --
> Zhipeng (Howard) Huang
>
> Principle Engineer
> OpenStack, Kubernetes, CNCF, LF Edge, ONNX, Kubeflow, OpenSDS, Open Service Broker API, OCP, Hyperledger, ETSI, SNIA, DMTF, W3C
>


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


--
Zhipeng (Howard) Huang

Principle Engineer
OpenStack, Kubernetes, CNCF, LF Edge, ONNX, Kubeflow, OpenSDS, Open Service Broker API, OCP, Hyperledger, ETSI, SNIA, DMTF, W3C


Re: [Policy][Security]Long Term Research Collaboration

Chris Aniszczyk
 

Could this work be done under the new Governance/Security SIG forming?

I'm not sure what the specific ask is here outside of a place to
collaborate / meet maybe?

On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 7:27 PM Zhipeng Huang <zhipengh512@...> wrote:

Hi TOC members,

In today's Policy WG's meeting[0] we discussed the possibility of introducing formal verification into the cloud native world in conjunction with policy engine, to form a complete cloud native policy architecture. However formal verification is not a subtle work and requires significant work on theoretic side. I'm wondering is there any mechanism within CNCF that we could do long term research collaboration ?

We believe this will hugely benefit Kubernetes, Istio and many other cloud native platforms in general to have formal verification capability. Other research topics could include things like security protocol building (e.g. noise framework) which would be also quite interesting.

[0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ihFfEfgViKlUMbY2NKxaJzBkgHh-Phk5hqKTzK-NEEs/edit?usp=sharing


--
Zhipeng (Howard) Huang

Principle Engineer
OpenStack, Kubernetes, CNCF, LF Edge, ONNX, Kubeflow, OpenSDS, Open Service Broker API, OCP, Hyperledger, ETSI, SNIA, DMTF, W3C

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


[Policy][Security]Long Term Research Collaboration

Zhipeng Huang
 

Hi TOC members,

In today's Policy WG's meeting[0] we discussed the possibility of introducing formal verification into the cloud native world in conjunction with policy engine, to form a complete cloud native policy architecture. However formal verification is not a subtle work and requires significant work on theoretic side. I'm wondering is there any mechanism within CNCF that we could do long term research collaboration ?

We believe this will hugely benefit Kubernetes, Istio and many other cloud native platforms in general to have formal verification capability. Other research topics could include things like security protocol building (e.g. noise framework) which would be also quite interesting.



--
Zhipeng (Howard) Huang

Principle Engineer
OpenStack, Kubernetes, CNCF, LF Edge, ONNX, Kubeflow, OpenSDS, Open Service Broker API, OCP, Hyperledger, ETSI, SNIA, DMTF, W3C


Re: [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

Rausch, Matt
 

+1 (non-binding)

 

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> On Behalf Of Yash Thakkar
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 1:52 PM
To: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

 

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

+1 (non-binding)

 

On Tue 2 Apr, 2019, 10:52 PM Chiradeep Vittal, <chiradeep.vittal@...> wrote:

+1 (nb)

On 3/29/19, 9:35 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of caniszczyk@...> wrote:

    fluentd has requested to move to the graduation maturity level:
    https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

    Brian Grant from the TOC has performed due diligence and called the vote:
    https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3089
    https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/54/project-health?orgId=1&var-repogroup_name=Fluentd

    Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal
    located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

    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







----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any attachments are from the NIPR and are intended only for the addressee. Information contained herein is confidential, and may be privileged or exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable federal or state law. This message is not intended as a waiver of the confidential, privileged or exempted status of the information transmitted. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution or use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error.


Re: [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

Yash Thakkar
 

+1 (non-binding)


On Tue 2 Apr, 2019, 10:52 PM Chiradeep Vittal, <chiradeep.vittal@...> wrote:
+1 (nb)

On 3/29/19, 9:35 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of caniszczyk@...> wrote:

    fluentd has requested to move to the graduation maturity level:
    https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

    Brian Grant from the TOC has performed due diligence and called the vote:
    https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3089
    https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/54/project-health?orgId=1&var-repogroup_name=Fluentd

    Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal
    located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

    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] fluentd moving to graduation

Chiradeep Vittal <chiradeep.vittal@...>
 

+1 (nb)

On 3/29/19, 9:35 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of caniszczyk@...> wrote:

fluentd has requested to move to the graduation maturity level:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

Brian Grant from the TOC has performed due diligence and called the vote:
https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3089
https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/54/project-health?orgId=1&var-repogroup_name=Fluentd

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal
located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

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] fluentd moving to graduation

Joe Beda <jbeda@...>
 

+1 binding

On 3/29/19, 9:35 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of caniszczyk@...> wrote:

fluentd has requested to move to the graduation maturity level:
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcncf%2Ftoc%2Fpull%2F69&;data=02%7C01%7Cjbeda%40vmware.com%7C2620b5144ad9438d916c08d6b46485ae%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C636894741166138894&amp;sdata=9ylTgGom6Fc2zAX9g7kGUCFk6osKq9jnv%2BnttnDvU20%3D&amp;reserved=0

Brian Grant from the TOC has performed due diligence and called the vote:
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.cncf.io%2Fg%2Fcncf-toc%2Fmessage%2F3089&;data=02%7C01%7Cjbeda%40vmware.com%7C2620b5144ad9438d916c08d6b46485ae%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C636894741166138894&amp;sdata=%2B3AYMkYiJTz9BmpZA7QJ%2FAj6jtS0pOATA8FTFa%2BFNZw%3D&amp;reserved=0
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fall.devstats.cncf.io%2Fd%2F54%2Fproject-health%3ForgId%3D1%26var-repogroup_name%3DFluentd&;data=02%7C01%7Cjbeda%40vmware.com%7C2620b5144ad9438d916c08d6b46485ae%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C636894741166138894&amp;sdata=3w88aDTuSz7XEWnuWDJ0A%2FFYlRulf8AVP7jYi9GDH3U%3D&amp;reserved=0

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal
located here: https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcncf%2Ftoc%2Fpull%2F69&;data=02%7C01%7Cjbeda%40vmware.com%7C2620b5144ad9438d916c08d6b46485ae%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C636894741166138894&amp;sdata=9ylTgGom6Fc2zAX9g7kGUCFk6osKq9jnv%2BnttnDvU20%3D&amp;reserved=0

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] OPA moving to incubation (PASSED)

Chris Aniszczyk
 


Re: [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

Philippe Robin
 

+1 (non-binding)

-----Original Message-----
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> On Behalf Of Chris Aniszczyk via Lists.Cncf.Io
Sent: 29 March 2019 16:35
To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] fluentd moving to graduation

fluentd has requested to move to the graduation maturity level:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

Brian Grant from the TOC has performed due diligence and called the vote:
https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3089
https://all.devstats.cncf.io/d/54/project-health?orgId=1&var-repogroup_name=Fluentd

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

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



IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.


Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation

Michelle Noorali
 

+1 binding

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Matt Klein via Lists.Cncf.Io <mattklein123=gmail.com@...>
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 8:24 PM
To: Chris Aniszczyk
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
 
+1 binding

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 6:30 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:

OPA has requested to move to the incubation maturity level:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/199

Since entering the CNCF Sandbox, OPA has demonstrated growth and progress. 12 releases were published with 480 commits from 41 individuals. Approximately 75% of the commits came from Styra, 7% Chef, 5% Cisco, and 13% others. In January 2019, Styra, Google, Microsoft, and others began jointly developing and contributing the OPA Gatekeeper sub-project. Gatekeeper integrates OPA with Kubernetes to help admins enforce admission control policies and audit clusters for existing policy violations.

Also since joining the CNCF, OPA has formalized a governance policy and undergone an external security audit: https://github.com/open-policy-agent/opa#security-audit
 
The OPA community believes it has fulfilled all the incubation criteria:
https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3047

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/199

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: [RESULT] CNCF SIGs proposal

Zhipeng Huang
 

Many thanks to Alex and Quinton, look forward to finally kicking off Governance/Security SIG :)


On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 4:34 AM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
want to thank others:
- erin
- matt f
- justin c
- sarah a
- et al. et al.


On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 9:30 PM Shannon Williams <shannon@...> wrote:

Great work Alexis and Quinton!

 

Best Regards,

 

Shannon Williams

Rancher Labs

shannon@...

+1 650-521-6902

 

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> On Behalf Of alexis richardson via Lists.Cncf.Io
Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 1:29 PM
To: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [RESULT] CNCF SIGs proposal

 

does happy dance

 

 

On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 9:24 PM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:

The CNCF SIGs proposal has been approved:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/194

+1 binding TOC votes (9/9):
Alexis: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3004
Jeff: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3006
Liz: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3007
Joe: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3022
Michelle: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3027
Matt: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3031
Brian: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3033
Brendan: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3034
Xiang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3068

+1 non-binding community votes:
Justin Cappos: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/2996
Zhipeng Huang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/2997
Stephen Augustus: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/2998
Davanum Srinivas: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/2999
Jon Mittelhauser: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3000
Ruben Orduz: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3001
Xing Yang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3002
Doug Davis: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3003
Sonya Koptyev: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3005
JJ: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3008
Alex Chircop: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3009
Justin Cormack: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3010
Gary Brown: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3011
Angel Ramirez: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3012
Geri Jennings: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3013
Erin Boyd: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3023
Igor Mameshin: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3026
Quinton Hoole: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3029
Eduardo Silva: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3032
Jimmy Song: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3041
Lee Calcote: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3044
Sandeep Shilawat: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3069
Ken Owens: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3076
Sarah Allen: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3122

Thanks all for voting, we look forward to kickstarting CNCF SIGs over
the next few weeks. We will start with the Governance/Security SIG
first.

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




--
Zhipeng (Howard) Huang

Principle Engineer
OpenStack, Kubernetes, CNCF, LF Edge, ONNX, Kubeflow, OpenSDS, Open Service Broker API, OCP, Hyperledger, ETSI, SNIA, DMTF, W3C

4561 - 4580 of 7712