1. cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io
  2. Messages
   Date   
Re: Contour to CNCF sandbox

Matt Klein
 

If we are targeting sandbox IMO we can just do it.

If incubation I think we need to route through SIG network (cc @Lee Calcote) for DD.

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 3:17 PM Joe Beda <jbeda@...> wrote:

Ah – my mistake.  I know we talked about it.  Chris added the “sandbox” label so that confused me.  I’ll fix it.

 

Agree that if we are talking incubation we should definitely have SIG-network start the process.

 

Sorry for the confusion!

 

From: Matt Klein <mattklein123@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 2:15 PM
To: Joe Beda <jbeda@...>
Cc: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] Contour to CNCF sandbox

 

The PR lists incubation as the desired level. So that is not accurate?

 

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 3:02 PM Joe Beda via Lists.Cncf.Io <jbeda=vmware.com@...> wrote:

Hi all,

 

I know we’ve talked about not syncing on TOC meetings to get new projects in.  As things stand, we have just submitted contour as a sandbox project and there is support from Alexis and Matt and me.

 

What do we want to consider necessary before we move forward?  Do we want to have SIG-network take a look or do we want to just “make it so”?

 

Personally, I’d be cool with just getting it in but don’t want to jump the gun.

 

Joe
Re: Contour to CNCF sandbox

Matt Klein
 

The PR lists incubation as the desired level. So that is not accurate?


On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 3:02 PM Joe Beda via Lists.Cncf.Io <jbeda=vmware.com@...> wrote:

Hi all,

 

I know we’ve talked about not syncing on TOC meetings to get new projects in.  As things stand, we have just submitted contour as a sandbox project and there is support from Alexis and Matt and me.

 

What do we want to consider necessary before we move forward?  Do we want to have SIG-network take a look or do we want to just “make it so”?

 

Personally, I’d be cool with just getting it in but don’t want to jump the gun.

 

Joe
Contour to CNCF sandbox

Joe Beda <jbeda@...>
 

Hi all,

 

I know we’ve talked about not syncing on TOC meetings to get new projects in.  As things stand, we have just submitted contour as a sandbox project and there is support from Alexis and Matt and me.

 

What do we want to consider necessary before we move forward?  Do we want to have SIG-network take a look or do we want to just “make it so”?

 

Personally, I’d be cool with just getting it in but don’t want to jump the gun.

 

Joe
Re: An interesting issue wrt CLA

swinslow@...
 

Thanks for raising this. In the case of Dependabot, if it is only modifying version numbers and hashes to bump dependency versions, I don't think there is any realistic concern that this bot would be contributing copyrightable content. That might not be the case for other bots but in this case I don't see a concern.

Because of that, from the CNCF / LF side I think we would be comfortable with having Dependabot changes not being blocked by the CLA bot. I'm coordinating with the LF IT team to whitelist Dependabot so that it will not be gated for the k8s CLA bot going forward.

Thanks,
Steve
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] An interesting issue wrt CLA

Matt Farina
 

document the desired approach in general.

What is the legal approach for a bot contributing code under a CLA? I'd be curious to know what the guard rails are. Then we can try to make the process as streamlined as possible.

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020, at 2:34 PM, Brendan Burns via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:
I will definitely ping GitHub folks about this, but I thought it useful to at least document the desired approach in general.




From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Matt Farina via Lists.Cncf.Io <matt=mattfarina.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 11:30 AM
To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Cc: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] An interesting issue wrt CLA
 
Bots can have delegated authority to sign things on behalf of their makers.

Dependabot is a service now owned by GitHub. Do we want to expect all people offering a service like this to sign the CNCF CLA and associate their bot with it? The person choosing to use the bot is different from those providing it and the person choosing to use it is a member of the project.

Dependabot is automatically generating a PR to update vulnerable dependencies, but of course the CNCF CLA is required

This problem only affects those using the CLA. Dependabot appropriately signs for the DCO. The majority of CNCF projects are not affected by this issue.

It seems like it would be even more important for this kind of a bot to have a signature since if it was compromised or impersonated (can I say that about a bot?) that could be a pretty powerful attack vector.

Dependabot creates a PR like any other random person to come along on GitHub. A person with merge access has to merge the PR and the PR has to pass tests and review as if a person were suggesting the same change. https://dependabot.com/#how-it-works

What would an attack vector for a bot like this be? If a bot had write access to the code I would be concerned.

Any thoughts about the right approach here?

A thought for this case...  GitHub is a CNCF member and has a signed CLA (I assume) since GitHub employees contribute to Kubernetes. Is there someone there who can add Dependabots account to the CLA?

This would be the quick and easy approach. It would not scale to similar services.

- Matt Farina

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020, at 2:05 PM, Sarah Allen wrote:
Bots can have delegated authority to sign things on behalf of their makers.  It seems like it would be even more important for this kind of a bot to have a signature since if it was compromised or impersonated (can I say that about a bot?) that could be a pretty powerful attack vector.

Thanks for raising this question!

Sarah



On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:50 AM Brendan Burns via Lists.Cncf.Io <bburns=microsoft.com@...> wrote:
Folks,
See:

Dependabot is automatically generating a PR to update vulnerable dependencies, but of course the CNCF CLA is required, and dependabot (being a bot) has no ability to sign.

Any thoughts about the right approach here? (for this specific one I'm going to clone the PR myself, but in general it's an interesting issue)

Thanks
--brendan
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] An interesting issue wrt CLA

Brendan Burns
 

I will definitely ping GitHub folks about this, but I thought it useful to at least document the desired approach in general.


From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Matt Farina via Lists.Cncf.Io <matt=mattfarina.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 11:30 AM
To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Cc: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] An interesting issue wrt CLA
 
Bots can have delegated authority to sign things on behalf of their makers.

Dependabot is a service now owned by GitHub. Do we want to expect all people offering a service like this to sign the CNCF CLA and associate their bot with it? The person choosing to use the bot is different from those providing it and the person choosing to use it is a member of the project.

Dependabot is automatically generating a PR to update vulnerable dependencies, but of course the CNCF CLA is required

This problem only affects those using the CLA. Dependabot appropriately signs for the DCO. The majority of CNCF projects are not affected by this issue.

It seems like it would be even more important for this kind of a bot to have a signature since if it was compromised or impersonated (can I say that about a bot?) that could be a pretty powerful attack vector.

Dependabot creates a PR like any other random person to come along on GitHub. A person with merge access has to merge the PR and the PR has to pass tests and review as if a person were suggesting the same change. https://dependabot.com/#how-it-works

What would an attack vector for a bot like this be? If a bot had write access to the code I would be concerned.

Any thoughts about the right approach here?

A thought for this case...  GitHub is a CNCF member and has a signed CLA (I assume) since GitHub employees contribute to Kubernetes. Is there someone there who can add Dependabots account to the CLA?

This would be the quick and easy approach. It would not scale to similar services.

- Matt Farina

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020, at 2:05 PM, Sarah Allen wrote:
Bots can have delegated authority to sign things on behalf of their makers.  It seems like it would be even more important for this kind of a bot to have a signature since if it was compromised or impersonated (can I say that about a bot?) that could be a pretty powerful attack vector.

Thanks for raising this question!

Sarah



On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:50 AM Brendan Burns via Lists.Cncf.Io <bburns=microsoft.com@...> wrote:
Folks,
See:

Dependabot is automatically generating a PR to update vulnerable dependencies, but of course the CNCF CLA is required, and dependabot (being a bot) has no ability to sign.

Any thoughts about the right approach here? (for this specific one I'm going to clone the PR myself, but in general it's an interesting issue)

Thanks
--brendan
Re: An interesting issue wrt CLA

Matt Farina
 

Bots can have delegated authority to sign things on behalf of their makers.

Dependabot is a service now owned by GitHub. Do we want to expect all people offering a service like this to sign the CNCF CLA and associate their bot with it? The person choosing to use the bot is different from those providing it and the person choosing to use it is a member of the project.

Dependabot is automatically generating a PR to update vulnerable dependencies, but of course the CNCF CLA is required

This problem only affects those using the CLA. Dependabot appropriately signs for the DCO. The majority of CNCF projects are not affected by this issue.

It seems like it would be even more important for this kind of a bot to have a signature since if it was compromised or impersonated (can I say that about a bot?) that could be a pretty powerful attack vector.

Dependabot creates a PR like any other random person to come along on GitHub. A person with merge access has to merge the PR and the PR has to pass tests and review as if a person were suggesting the same change. https://dependabot.com/#how-it-works

What would an attack vector for a bot like this be? If a bot had write access to the code I would be concerned.

Any thoughts about the right approach here?

A thought for this case...  GitHub is a CNCF member and has a signed CLA (I assume) since GitHub employees contribute to Kubernetes. Is there someone there who can add Dependabots account to the CLA?

This would be the quick and easy approach. It would not scale to similar services.

- Matt Farina

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020, at 2:05 PM, Sarah Allen wrote:
Bots can have delegated authority to sign things on behalf of their makers.  It seems like it would be even more important for this kind of a bot to have a signature since if it was compromised or impersonated (can I say that about a bot?) that could be a pretty powerful attack vector.

Thanks for raising this question!

Sarah



On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:50 AM Brendan Burns via Lists.Cncf.Io <bburns=microsoft.com@...> wrote:
Folks,
See:

Dependabot is automatically generating a PR to update vulnerable dependencies, but of course the CNCF CLA is required, and dependabot (being a bot) has no ability to sign.

Any thoughts about the right approach here? (for this specific one I'm going to clone the PR myself, but in general it's an interesting issue)

Thanks
--brendan
Re: [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Hong Zhang <cathy.zhang@...>
 

+1 NB

Cheers,
Cathy Zhang

On 6 January 2020 at 21:39:42, Amye Scavarda Perrin (ascavarda@...) wrote:
A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan
Burns as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added.
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal
located
here:
https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgith
ub.com%2Fcncf%2Ftoc%2Fpull%2F319&amp;data=02%7C01%7Ccathy.zhang%40futu
rewei.com%7C4b93f7e969a645a1111608d79397d3b5%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1
d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637140152625209879&amp;sdata=mmY99tBGcY57h58M5Fxox
4niQ6POwMiJeMMJuAtkj%2Bc%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!

--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF |
amye@...



Amazon Data Services Ireland Limited registered office: One Burlington Plaza, Burlington Road, Dublin 4, Ireland. Registered in Ireland. Registration number 390566.
Re: An interesting issue wrt CLA

Sarah Allen
 

Bots can have delegated authority to sign things on behalf of their makers.  It seems like it would be even more important for this kind of a bot to have a signature since if it was compromised or impersonated (can I say that about a bot?) that could be a pretty powerful attack vector.

Thanks for raising this question!

Sarah



On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:50 AM Brendan Burns via Lists.Cncf.Io <bburns=microsoft.com@...> wrote:
Folks,
See:

Dependabot is automatically generating a PR to update vulnerable dependencies, but of course the CNCF CLA is required, and dependabot (being a bot) has no ability to sign.

Any thoughts about the right approach here? (for this specific one I'm going to clone the PR myself, but in general it's an interesting issue)

Thanks
--brendan
An interesting issue wrt CLA

Brendan Burns
 

Folks,
See:

Dependabot is automatically generating a PR to update vulnerable dependencies, but of course the CNCF CLA is required, and dependabot (being a bot) has no ability to sign.

Any thoughts about the right approach here? (for this specific one I'm going to clone the PR myself, but in general it's an interesting issue)

Thanks
--brendan
Re: [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Kiran Mova
 

+1 NB


On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:04 PM Hausenblas, Michael via Lists.Cncf.Io <hausenbl=amazon.com@...> wrote:
+1 (nb)

Cheers,
Michael

--

Developer Advocate @ AWS
+353 86 0215164

On 6 January 2020 at 21:39:42, Amye Scavarda Perrin (ascavarda@...) wrote:
> A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns
> as the TOC liaisons.
>
> Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added.
> Tech Leads to be decided in the future.
>
> Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located
> here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319
>
> Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate
> non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
>
> --
> Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
>
>
>
>
Amazon Data Services Ireland Limited registered office: One Burlington Plaza, Burlington Road, Dublin 4, Ireland. Registered in Ireland. Registration number 390566.
Re: [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Hausenblas, Michael
 

+1 (nb)

Cheers,
Michael

--

Developer Advocate @ AWS
+353 86 0215164

On 6 January 2020 at 21:39:42, Amye Scavarda Perrin (ascavarda@...) wrote:
A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns
as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added.
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located
here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319

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

--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...



Amazon Data Services Ireland Limited registered office: One Burlington Plaza, Burlington Road, Dublin 4, Ireland. Registered in Ireland. Registration number 390566.
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Li, Xiang
 

------------------------------------------------------------------
发件人：Brendan Burns via Lists.Cncf.Io<bburns=microsoft.com@...>
日　期：2020年01月08日 01:21:26
收件人：briangrant@...<briangrant@...>; Liz Rice<liz@...>
抄　送：<cncf-toc@...>
主　题：Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] SIG Runtime

+1, binding

--brendan

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Brian Grant via Lists.Cncf.Io <briangrant=google.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 8:25:17 AM
To: Liz Rice <liz@...>
Cc: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] SIG Runtime
 
+1 binding

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 6:49 AM Liz Rice <liz@...> wrote:
+1 binding (on the assumption the minor details in the PR get addressed) 

--
Liz Rice
@lizrice | lizrice.com | +44 (0) 780 126 1145
On 7 Jan 2020, 14:00 +0000, Pengfei Ni , wrote:
+1 nb


Best regards.


---
Pengfei Ni



Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> 于2020年1月7日周二 上午5:39写道：
A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added. 
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
 
--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Brendan Burns
 

+1, binding

--brendan

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Brian Grant via Lists.Cncf.Io <briangrant=google.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 8:25:17 AM
To: Liz Rice <liz@...>
Cc: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] SIG Runtime
 
+1 binding

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 6:49 AM Liz Rice <liz@...> wrote:
+1 binding (on the assumption the minor details in the PR get addressed) 

--
Liz Rice
@lizrice | lizrice.com | +44 (0) 780 126 1145
On 7 Jan 2020, 14:00 +0000, Pengfei Ni , wrote:
+1 nb


Best regards.


---
Pengfei Ni



Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> 于2020年1月7日周二 上午5:39写道：
A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added. 
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
 
--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
Re: [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Brian Grant
 

CNCF SIGs should not affect Kubernetes SIGs.


On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 7:41 AM Ricardo <raravena80@...> wrote:
Xu,

AFAIK, k8s sig-node should remain as it is. Part of this group's focus would be working with sig-node so that runtimes can interface with k8s. For example, having a particular runtime implement the CRI.

Thx,
Ricardo


On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 12:48 AM Xu Wang via Lists.Cncf.Io <xu=hyper.sh@...> wrote:
+1 nb.

And one question: How will the SIG-Runtime work affect Kubernetes SIG-Node?

------------------------------------------------------------------
From:Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...>
Send Time:2020年1月7日(星期二) 05:42
To:CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject:[cncf-toc] [VOTE] SIG Runtime

A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added. 
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
 
--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
Re: [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Brian Grant
 

+1 binding

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 6:49 AM Liz Rice <liz@...> wrote:
+1 binding (on the assumption the minor details in the PR get addressed) 

--
Liz Rice
@lizrice | lizrice.com | +44 (0) 780 126 1145
On 7 Jan 2020, 14:00 +0000, Pengfei Ni , wrote:
+1 nb


Best regards.


---
Pengfei Ni



Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> 于2020年1月7日周二 上午5:39写道：
A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added. 
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
 
--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
Re: [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Haining Zhang
 

+1 nb

On 1/7/20 5:39 AM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:
A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added. 
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
 
--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
_._,_._,_
[RESULT] SIG Network (Approved)

Amye Scavarda Perrin
 

The CNCF Network SIG has been approved:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/317

Binding: 6/9
Matt Klein: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3757
alexis richardson: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3759
Jeff Brewer: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3781
Liz Rice: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3783
Joe Beda: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3789
Xiang Li: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3806


Non-Binding:
Lee Calcote: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3752
Dave Zolotusky: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3753
Gou Rao: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3754
Alex Chircop: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3755
Jon Mittelhauser: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3756
Xing Yang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3758
Ken Owens: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3762
Suresh Krishnan: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3763
Roger Klorese: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3764
Anil Vishnoi: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3766
Golfen Guo: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3768
Jeyappragash Jeyakeerthi: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3770
Steven Dake: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3773
Nicola Marco Decandia: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3774
Kiran Mova: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3776
Michael H Payne: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3782
Chris Short: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3795
Natraj Thuduppathy: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3796
Klaus Ma: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3799

--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
Re: [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Ricardo Aravena
 

Xu,

AFAIK, k8s sig-node should remain as it is. Part of this group's focus would be working with sig-node so that runtimes can interface with k8s. For example, having a particular runtime implement the CRI.

Thx,
Ricardo


On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 12:48 AM Xu Wang via Lists.Cncf.Io <xu=hyper.sh@...> wrote:
+1 nb.

And one question: How will the SIG-Runtime work affect Kubernetes SIG-Node?

------------------------------------------------------------------
From:Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...>
Send Time:2020年1月7日(星期二) 05:42
To:CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject:[cncf-toc] [VOTE] SIG Runtime

A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added. 
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
 
--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
Re: [VOTE] SIG Runtime

Liz Rice
 

+1 binding (on the assumption the minor details in the PR get addressed) 

--
Liz Rice
@lizrice | lizrice.com | +44 (0) 780 126 1145

On 7 Jan 2020, 14:00 +0000, Pengfei Ni , wrote:
+1 nb


Best regards.


---
Pengfei Ni



Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> 于2020年1月7日周二 上午5:39写道：
A new CNCF Runtime SIG has been proposed with Brian Grant and Brendan Burns as the TOC liaisons.

Co-Chairs: Quinton Hoole, Ricardo Aravena, with one more to be added. 
Tech Leads to be decided in the future.

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/319

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!
 
--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager, CNCF | amye@...
3141 - 3160 of 7187