Date   

Re: [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

Richard Hartmann
 

Hi Matt,


thanks for this!

Two updates: My Twitter is @TwitchiH and you can put me down as working for Grafana.


Best,
Richard

PS: In all seriousness, if I lose, I want to lose to you.


Sent by mobile; please excuse my brevity.

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 00:42 Matt Farina <matt@...> wrote:
I was curios about the candidates and the process... so I wrote down what I saw in an election guide blog post. There's at least one link/reference for each candidate running (usually more), their location (should everyone be in the Pacific time zone?), and some more details on the process. Hope it's useful to someone doing due diligence on voting.

Cheers,
Matt

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:
Congratulations to our nominees for the Technical Oversight Committee! 
These nominees have all passed the qualification process from the Governing Board and TOC. 

Our nominees are:
Saad Ali
John Belamaric
Erin Boyd
Lee Calcote
Alex Chircop
Justin Cormack
Matt Farina
Katie Gamanji
Richard Hartmann
Michael Hausenblas
Zhengyu He
Quinton Hoole
Frederick Kautz
Wei Lai
Vallery Lancey
Sheng Liang
Bryan Liles
Haifeng Liu
Kris Nova
Alena Prokharchyk
Liz Rice
Torin Sandall
Brian Scott
Eduardo Silva
Sugu Sougoumarane
Liu Tang
Ed Warnicke

Voting is now open for the five (5) seats available: three (3) from the Governing Board, one (1) from the End Users and one (1) from the maintainers of incubating and graduated projects. Voting will close on February 3, 2020 at 11:59am Pacific time, and the election results will be announced on February 3rd.

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


Re: 回复:[cncf-toc] [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

Matt Farina
 

Zhengyu, thanks for letting me know. I've updated the post.

Regards,
Matt

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, at 7:44 AM, Zhengyu He via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:
A minor correction: I'm based in Hangzhou, China. I forgot to update my linkedin.

Thanks,
Zhengyu





------------------------------------------------------------------
发件人:Matt Farina <matt@...>
发送时间:2020年1月28日(星期二) 07:45
收件人:CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
主 题:Re: [cncf-toc] [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

I was curios about the candidates and the process... so I wrote down what I saw in an election guide blog post. There's at least one link/reference for each candidate running (usually more), their location (should everyone be in the Pacific time zone?), and some more details on the process. Hope it's useful to someone doing due diligence on voting.

Cheers,
Matt

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:
Congratulations to our nominees for the Technical Oversight Committee! 
These nominees have all passed the qualification process from the Governing Board and TOC. 

Our nominees are:
Saad Ali
John Belamaric
Erin Boyd
Lee Calcote
Alex Chircop
Justin Cormack
Matt Farina
Katie Gamanji
Richard Hartmann
Michael Hausenblas
Zhengyu He
Quinton Hoole
Frederick Kautz
Wei Lai
Vallery Lancey
Sheng Liang
Bryan Liles
Haifeng Liu
Kris Nova
Alena Prokharchyk
Liz Rice
Torin Sandall
Brian Scott
Eduardo Silva
Sugu Sougoumarane
Liu Tang
Ed Warnicke

Voting is now open for the five (5) seats available: three (3) from the Governing Board, one (1) from the End Users and one (1) from the maintainers of incubating and graduated projects. Voting will close on February 3, 2020 at 11:59am Pacific time, and the election results will be announced on February 3rd.

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




回复:[cncf-toc] [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

Zhengyu He
 

A minor correction: I'm based in Hangzhou, China. I forgot to update my linkedin.

Thanks,
Zhengyu





------------------------------------------------------------------
发件人:Matt Farina <matt@...>
发送时间:2020年1月28日(星期二) 07:45
收件人:CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
主 题:Re: [cncf-toc] [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

I was curios about the candidates and the process... so I wrote down what I saw in an election guide blog post. There's at least one link/reference for each candidate running (usually more), their location (should everyone be in the Pacific time zone?), and some more details on the process. Hope it's useful to someone doing due diligence on voting.

Cheers,
Matt

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:
Congratulations to our nominees for the Technical Oversight Committee! 
These nominees have all passed the qualification process from the Governing Board and TOC. 

Our nominees are:
Saad Ali
John Belamaric
Erin Boyd
Lee Calcote
Alex Chircop
Justin Cormack
Matt Farina
Katie Gamanji
Richard Hartmann
Michael Hausenblas
Zhengyu He
Quinton Hoole
Frederick Kautz
Wei Lai
Vallery Lancey
Sheng Liang
Bryan Liles
Haifeng Liu
Kris Nova
Alena Prokharchyk
Liz Rice
Torin Sandall
Brian Scott
Eduardo Silva
Sugu Sougoumarane
Liu Tang
Ed Warnicke

Voting is now open for the five (5) seats available: three (3) from the Governing Board, one (1) from the End Users and one (1) from the maintainers of incubating and graduated projects. Voting will close on February 3, 2020 at 11:59am Pacific time, and the election results will be announced on February 3rd.

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



Re: [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

刘海锋 <bjliuhaifeng@...>
 

 

Thank you Matt. It’s quite convenient.

 

--Haifeng Liu

 

 

发件人: <cncf-toc@...> 代表 Matt Farina <matt@...>
日期: 2020128 星期二 上午7:42
收件人: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
主题: Re: [cncf-toc] [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

 

I was curios about the candidates and the process... so I wrote down what I saw in an election guide blog post. There's at least one link/reference for each candidate running (usually more), their location (should everyone be in the Pacific time zone?), and some more details on the process. Hope it's useful to someone doing due diligence on voting.

 

Cheers,

Matt

 

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:

Congratulations to our nominees for the Technical Oversight Committee! 

These nominees have all passed the qualification process from the Governing Board and TOC. 

 

Our nominees are:

Saad Ali

John Belamaric

Erin Boyd

Lee Calcote

Alex Chircop

Justin Cormack

Matt Farina

Katie Gamanji

Richard Hartmann

Michael Hausenblas

Zhengyu He

Quinton Hoole

Frederick Kautz

Wei Lai

Vallery Lancey

Sheng Liang

Bryan Liles

Haifeng Liu

Kris Nova

Alena Prokharchyk

Liz Rice

Torin Sandall

Brian Scott

Eduardo Silva

Sugu Sougoumarane

Liu Tang

Ed Warnicke

 

Voting is now open for the five (5) seats available: three (3) from the Governing Board, one (1) from the End Users and one (1) from the maintainers of incubating and graduated projects. Voting will close on February 3, 2020 at 11:59am Pacific time, and the election results will be announced on February 3rd.

 

--

Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager | amye@...

 


Re: [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

Chris Short
 

Thank you, Matt.

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 18:42 Matt Farina <matt@...> wrote:
I was curios about the candidates and the process... so I wrote down what I saw in an election guide blog post. There's at least one link/reference for each candidate running (usually more), their location (should everyone be in the Pacific time zone?), and some more details on the process. Hope it's useful to someone doing due diligence on voting.

Cheers,
Matt

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:
Congratulations to our nominees for the Technical Oversight Committee! 
These nominees have all passed the qualification process from the Governing Board and TOC. 

Our nominees are:
Saad Ali
John Belamaric
Erin Boyd
Lee Calcote
Alex Chircop
Justin Cormack
Matt Farina
Katie Gamanji
Richard Hartmann
Michael Hausenblas
Zhengyu He
Quinton Hoole
Frederick Kautz
Wei Lai
Vallery Lancey
Sheng Liang
Bryan Liles
Haifeng Liu
Kris Nova
Alena Prokharchyk
Liz Rice
Torin Sandall
Brian Scott
Eduardo Silva
Sugu Sougoumarane
Liu Tang
Ed Warnicke

Voting is now open for the five (5) seats available: three (3) from the Governing Board, one (1) from the End Users and one (1) from the maintainers of incubating and graduated projects. Voting will close on February 3, 2020 at 11:59am Pacific time, and the election results will be announced on February 3rd.

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

--

Chris Short
He/Him/His


Re: [TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

Matt Farina
 

I was curios about the candidates and the process... so I wrote down what I saw in an election guide blog post. There's at least one link/reference for each candidate running (usually more), their location (should everyone be in the Pacific time zone?), and some more details on the process. Hope it's useful to someone doing due diligence on voting.

Cheers,
Matt

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:
Congratulations to our nominees for the Technical Oversight Committee! 
These nominees have all passed the qualification process from the Governing Board and TOC. 

Our nominees are:
Saad Ali
John Belamaric
Erin Boyd
Lee Calcote
Alex Chircop
Justin Cormack
Matt Farina
Katie Gamanji
Richard Hartmann
Michael Hausenblas
Zhengyu He
Quinton Hoole
Frederick Kautz
Wei Lai
Vallery Lancey
Sheng Liang
Bryan Liles
Haifeng Liu
Kris Nova
Alena Prokharchyk
Liz Rice
Torin Sandall
Brian Scott
Eduardo Silva
Sugu Sougoumarane
Liu Tang
Ed Warnicke

Voting is now open for the five (5) seats available: three (3) from the Governing Board, one (1) from the End Users and one (1) from the maintainers of incubating and graduated projects. Voting will close on February 3, 2020 at 11:59am Pacific time, and the election results will be announced on February 3rd.

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


[TOC Election] Qualified Nominees for January/February 2020 Election

Amye Scavarda Perrin
 

Congratulations to our nominees for the Technical Oversight Committee! 
These nominees have all passed the qualification process from the Governing Board and TOC. 

Our nominees are:
Saad Ali
John Belamaric
Erin Boyd
Lee Calcote
Alex Chircop
Justin Cormack
Matt Farina
Katie Gamanji
Richard Hartmann
Michael Hausenblas
Zhengyu He
Quinton Hoole
Frederick Kautz
Wei Lai
Vallery Lancey
Sheng Liang
Bryan Liles
Haifeng Liu
Kris Nova
Alena Prokharchyk
Liz Rice
Torin Sandall
Brian Scott
Eduardo Silva
Sugu Sougoumarane
Liu Tang
Ed Warnicke

Voting is now open for the five (5) seats available: three (3) from the Governing Board, one (1) from the End Users and one (1) from the maintainers of incubating and graduated projects. Voting will close on February 3, 2020 at 11:59am Pacific time, and the election results will be announced on February 3rd.

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


Re: Update on CloudEvents Project

Liz Rice
 

Thanks for the update, Doug. It makes sense to have subscription / discovery APIs to complement the existing CloudEvents, and doing them as part of the same project sgtm. 

Comments from the community are welcome! 

--
Liz Rice - sent from my phone

On 24 Jan 2020, at 02:19, Doug Davis <dug@...> wrote:



TOC Members,

With CloudEvents reaching the v1.0 milestone, the Serverless WG has been looking at what additional pain points might the community be running into. After several meetings the WG produced the following “top candidate” possibilities:
- Subscription and Discovery APIs (includes Delivery API)
- Function Signatures
- End-to-End Security for Event Delivery
- Packaging Contract

After some discussions the WG decided on “Subscription and Discovery APIs” and to work on it under the CloudEvents project rather than as a Serverless WG task. Some rationale for this decision included:
- Once event producers generate CloudEvents, it’s only natural to then ask how an event consumer can determine, apriori, which CloudEvents will be generated. Additionally, how can an event consumer requests the delivery of those CloudEvents.
- This should help in the tooling and automation of connecting consumers to producers.

For the other WG topics above, there was an admission that trying to standardize on a solution for those issues might either be 1) a rather significant undertaking, and we were looking for a smaller problem to tackle, or 2) the issues would be filled with political landmines at this time. Both of which might reduce the likelihood of adoption on a broad scale right now. However, there was some discussion about the Serverless WG doing some exploration of possible solutions for those topics in the background to test the waters.

The purpose of this note is to update the TOC on the CloudEvents project’s plans and if there is a desire for more information, or for one of us to join an upcoming TOC call to answer questions in real-time, please let us know.

thanks
-Mark Peek, Ken Owens and Doug Davis



Update on CloudEvents Project

Doug Davis <dug@...>
 

TOC Members,

With CloudEvents reaching the v1.0 milestone, the Serverless WG has been looking at what additional pain points might the community be running into. After several meetings the WG produced the following “top candidate” possibilities:
- Subscription and Discovery APIs (includes Delivery API)
- Function Signatures
- End-to-End Security for Event Delivery
- Packaging Contract

After some discussions the WG decided on “Subscription and Discovery APIs” and to work on it under the CloudEvents project rather than as a Serverless WG task. Some rationale for this decision included:
- Once event producers generate CloudEvents, it’s only natural to then ask how an event consumer can determine, apriori, which CloudEvents will be generated. Additionally, how can an event consumer requests the delivery of those CloudEvents.
- This should help in the tooling and automation of connecting consumers to producers.

For the other WG topics above, there was an admission that trying to standardize on a solution for those issues might either be 1) a rather significant undertaking, and we were looking for a smaller problem to tackle, or 2) the issues would be filled with political landmines at this time. Both of which might reduce the likelihood of adoption on a broad scale right now. However, there was some discussion about the Serverless WG doing some exploration of possible solutions for those topics in the background to test the waters.

The purpose of this note is to update the TOC on the CloudEvents project’s plans and if there is a desire for more information, or for one of us to join an upcoming TOC call to answer questions in real-time, please let us know.

thanks
-Mark Peek, Ken Owens and Doug Davis



Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Paris Pittman <parispittman@...>
 

Thanks everyone! :) Based on the doodle poll, I'll go ahead and set up two times which gives more folks opportunities to join across time zones. I'll get the invites out ASAP to those who entered their info in the poll. 

  • Weds, Jan 29 @ 4:00pm PT (12amUTC)
  • Thurs, Jan 30 @ 7:30am PT (3:30pmUTC)

Spread the word to your networks and projects that may be interested. Reply to me for an invite if you'd like to participate. It would be good for those who want to be heavily involved with leading discovery and working group planning, to step forward now so we see skills/interest areas which will help shape the charter, too. Looking forward to it.


On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:05 AM Alena Prokharchyk via Lists.Cncf.Io <aprokharchyk=apple.com@...> wrote:
+1 NB, this is awesome

-alena

> On Jan 23, 2020, at 6:09 AM, Geri Jennings <geri.jennings@...> wrote:
>
> +1 NB. I look forward to seeing the evolution of CNCF with this SIG in place.
>
> On 1/23/20, 8:11 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Richard Hartmann" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of richih@...> wrote:
>
>    +1 NB
>
>    On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 1:43 AM Matt Klein <mattklein123@...> wrote:
>
>> Big +1 from me. Very excited to see this SIG form as I think this is an area that many projects struggle with. The projects that don't struggle with this have some very overworked maintainers. ;)
>
>    *cough* and *cough*
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> This e-mail may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure.
> If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, do not duplicate or redistribute it by any means. Please delete it and any attachments and notify the sender that you have received it in error.
>
>
>






--

Paris Pittman

Kubernetes Community

Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud

345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105



Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Alena Prokharchyk
 

+1 NB, this is awesome

-alena

On Jan 23, 2020, at 6:09 AM, Geri Jennings <geri.jennings@cyberark.com> wrote:

+1 NB. I look forward to seeing the evolution of CNCF with this SIG in place.

On 1/23/20, 8:11 AM, "cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io on behalf of Richard Hartmann" <cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io on behalf of richih@richih.org> wrote:

+1 NB

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 1:43 AM Matt Klein <mattklein123@gmail.com> wrote:

Big +1 from me. Very excited to see this SIG form as I think this is an area that many projects struggle with. The projects that don't struggle with this have some very overworked maintainers. ;)
*cough* and *cough*






----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
This e-mail may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, do not duplicate or redistribute it by any means. Please delete it and any attachments and notify the sender that you have received it in error.



Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Kiran Mova
 

+1 NB. Thank you! 


On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 7:39 PM Geri Jennings <geri.jennings@...> wrote:
+1 NB. I look forward to seeing the evolution of CNCF with this SIG in place.

On 1/23/20, 8:11 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of Richard Hartmann" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of richih@...> wrote:

    +1 NB

    On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 1:43 AM Matt Klein <mattklein123@...> wrote:

    > Big +1 from me. Very excited to see this SIG form as I think this is an area that many projects struggle with. The projects that don't struggle with this have some very overworked maintainers. ;)

    *cough* and *cough*






----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
This e-mail may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, do not duplicate or redistribute it by any means. Please delete it and any attachments and notify the sender that you have received it in error.




Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Geri Jennings
 

+1 NB. I look forward to seeing the evolution of CNCF with this SIG in place.

On 1/23/20, 8:11 AM, "cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io on behalf of Richard Hartmann" <cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io on behalf of richih@richih.org> wrote:

+1 NB

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 1:43 AM Matt Klein <mattklein123@gmail.com> wrote:

> Big +1 from me. Very excited to see this SIG form as I think this is an area that many projects struggle with. The projects that don't struggle with this have some very overworked maintainers. ;)

*cough* and *cough*






----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
This e-mail may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, do not duplicate or redistribute it by any means. Please delete it and any attachments and notify the sender that you have received it in error.


Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Richard Hartmann
 

+1 NB

On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 1:43 AM Matt Klein <mattklein123@gmail.com> wrote:

Big +1 from me. Very excited to see this SIG form as I think this is an area that many projects struggle with. The projects that don't struggle with this have some very overworked maintainers. ;)
*cough* and *cough*


Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Pengfei Ni
 

+1 NB


Best regards.


---
Pengfei Ni



Igor Mameshin <igor@...> 于2020年1月23日周四 下午1:07写道:

+1 NB

Thank you,
Igor

--
Igor Mameshin · CTO · Agile Stacks, Inc · Mobile: 858.229.7358 · igor@...



On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:00 PM Stephen Augustus <Stephen@...> wrote:
Huge +1 to the proposal and echoing Gerred's sentiment for Paris as a Chair if/when this forms.

SIG ContribEx is _one of_ the most important SIGs in Kubernetes and Paris has been an absolute force there.

We'd be lucky to have her affecting change on the CNCF SIG level! :)

-- Stephen

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 14:45 Gerred Dillon <hello@...> wrote:
+1 NB this is the most important SIG in Kubernetes. I know this isn't the right thread for my followup, but since chairs are confirmed by the TOC I immediately +1 Paris as a co-chair, if she is nominated, as a chair for this SIG. In short, she kicks the llama's ass (I haven't asked the WinAMP llama how they feel about this) and not only is the best person for this role, will also find fantastic successors to this role. Thanks, Paris, for driving this.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:26 PM Kris Nova <kris.nova@...> wrote:
Great presentation today - where can I sign up? We need this SIG ASAP. 

+1 NB

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:19 AM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
Good summary Matt!

Paris, just wanted to say thanks for your presentation today. 

A


On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, 18:17 Matt Farina, <matt@...> wrote:
Paris,

On the call today you suggested pairing down the scope of the SIG because there is so much proposed. It occured to me that contributing to the CNCF can mean a lot of things. To large areas are contributions to SIGs and to projects. In your opinion, should the SIG initially be limited to one area of focus (and if so which one) or to focus on both?

For those not familiar... CNCF SIGs are a little different from Kubernetes SIGs.  Kubernetes SIGs own and are responsible for code within Kubernetes. CNCF SIGs are an extension of the TOC:

The CNCF TOC Special Interest Groups scale contributions by the CNCF technical and user community, while retaining integrity and increasing quality in support of our mission.

Each project has their own governance model and contribution process. Where Kubernetes SIGs have a solid line or ownership to Kubernetes code, CNCF TOC SIGs have a dotted line relationship to CNCF Projects who own the code and governance. The dotted line relationship means that projects do work with and connect to a SIG but the ownership model is different.

Regards,
Matt

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:
Thanks TOC and community members for your time today on the call and support via mailing list. 

Next steps: smooth out the charter and have interested folks step forward to help bootstrap. after, TOC vote/review later on. 
doodle poll[1] for those who are interested. looking forward to this!

paris 




On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ricardo Aravena <raravena80@...> wrote:
+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.



On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:
+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:
  • This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  • Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.

paris






--


Paris Pittman
Kubernetes Community
Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud
345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105






--


Paris Pittman

Kubernetes Community

Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud

345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105





--
Kris Nova
Chief Open Source Advocate


85 2nd Street
San Francisco, CA 94105


Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Igor Mameshin
 

+1 NB

Thank you,
Igor

--
Igor Mameshin · CTO · Agile Stacks, Inc · Mobile: 858.229.7358 · igor@...



On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:00 PM Stephen Augustus <Stephen@...> wrote:
Huge +1 to the proposal and echoing Gerred's sentiment for Paris as a Chair if/when this forms.

SIG ContribEx is _one of_ the most important SIGs in Kubernetes and Paris has been an absolute force there.

We'd be lucky to have her affecting change on the CNCF SIG level! :)

-- Stephen

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 14:45 Gerred Dillon <hello@...> wrote:
+1 NB this is the most important SIG in Kubernetes. I know this isn't the right thread for my followup, but since chairs are confirmed by the TOC I immediately +1 Paris as a co-chair, if she is nominated, as a chair for this SIG. In short, she kicks the llama's ass (I haven't asked the WinAMP llama how they feel about this) and not only is the best person for this role, will also find fantastic successors to this role. Thanks, Paris, for driving this.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:26 PM Kris Nova <kris.nova@...> wrote:
Great presentation today - where can I sign up? We need this SIG ASAP. 

+1 NB

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:19 AM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
Good summary Matt!

Paris, just wanted to say thanks for your presentation today. 

A


On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, 18:17 Matt Farina, <matt@...> wrote:
Paris,

On the call today you suggested pairing down the scope of the SIG because there is so much proposed. It occured to me that contributing to the CNCF can mean a lot of things. To large areas are contributions to SIGs and to projects. In your opinion, should the SIG initially be limited to one area of focus (and if so which one) or to focus on both?

For those not familiar... CNCF SIGs are a little different from Kubernetes SIGs.  Kubernetes SIGs own and are responsible for code within Kubernetes. CNCF SIGs are an extension of the TOC:

The CNCF TOC Special Interest Groups scale contributions by the CNCF technical and user community, while retaining integrity and increasing quality in support of our mission.

Each project has their own governance model and contribution process. Where Kubernetes SIGs have a solid line or ownership to Kubernetes code, CNCF TOC SIGs have a dotted line relationship to CNCF Projects who own the code and governance. The dotted line relationship means that projects do work with and connect to a SIG but the ownership model is different.

Regards,
Matt

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:
Thanks TOC and community members for your time today on the call and support via mailing list. 

Next steps: smooth out the charter and have interested folks step forward to help bootstrap. after, TOC vote/review later on. 
doodle poll[1] for those who are interested. looking forward to this!

paris 




On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ricardo Aravena <raravena80@...> wrote:
+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.



On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:
+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:
  • This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  • Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.

paris






--


Paris Pittman
Kubernetes Community
Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud
345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105






--


Paris Pittman

Kubernetes Community

Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud

345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105





--
Kris Nova
Chief Open Source Advocate


85 2nd Street
San Francisco, CA 94105


Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Stephen Augustus
 

Huge +1 to the proposal and echoing Gerred's sentiment for Paris as a Chair if/when this forms.

SIG ContribEx is _one of_ the most important SIGs in Kubernetes and Paris has been an absolute force there.

We'd be lucky to have her affecting change on the CNCF SIG level! :)

-- Stephen

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 14:45 Gerred Dillon <hello@...> wrote:
+1 NB this is the most important SIG in Kubernetes. I know this isn't the right thread for my followup, but since chairs are confirmed by the TOC I immediately +1 Paris as a co-chair, if she is nominated, as a chair for this SIG. In short, she kicks the llama's ass (I haven't asked the WinAMP llama how they feel about this) and not only is the best person for this role, will also find fantastic successors to this role. Thanks, Paris, for driving this.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:26 PM Kris Nova <kris.nova@...> wrote:
Great presentation today - where can I sign up? We need this SIG ASAP. 

+1 NB

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:19 AM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
Good summary Matt!

Paris, just wanted to say thanks for your presentation today. 

A


On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, 18:17 Matt Farina, <matt@...> wrote:
Paris,

On the call today you suggested pairing down the scope of the SIG because there is so much proposed. It occured to me that contributing to the CNCF can mean a lot of things. To large areas are contributions to SIGs and to projects. In your opinion, should the SIG initially be limited to one area of focus (and if so which one) or to focus on both?

For those not familiar... CNCF SIGs are a little different from Kubernetes SIGs.  Kubernetes SIGs own and are responsible for code within Kubernetes. CNCF SIGs are an extension of the TOC:

The CNCF TOC Special Interest Groups scale contributions by the CNCF technical and user community, while retaining integrity and increasing quality in support of our mission.

Each project has their own governance model and contribution process. Where Kubernetes SIGs have a solid line or ownership to Kubernetes code, CNCF TOC SIGs have a dotted line relationship to CNCF Projects who own the code and governance. The dotted line relationship means that projects do work with and connect to a SIG but the ownership model is different.

Regards,
Matt

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io wrote:
Thanks TOC and community members for your time today on the call and support via mailing list. 

Next steps: smooth out the charter and have interested folks step forward to help bootstrap. after, TOC vote/review later on. 
doodle poll[1] for those who are interested. looking forward to this!

paris 




On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ricardo Aravena <raravena80@...> wrote:
+1 nb

I think healthy projects have to have happy maintainers and contributors to thrive long-term. Also, part of that is for them to feel genuinely welcomed and included.



On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 6:51 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:
+1 NB. This SIG stands to benefit all projects, and hopefully, help recognize all types of contributors (non-code). I’d like to see a contributor ladder come forth here.

- Lee

On Jan 17, 2020, at 4:48 PM, Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:

Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:
  • This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  • Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.

paris






--


Paris Pittman
Kubernetes Community
Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud
345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105






--


Paris Pittman

Kubernetes Community

Open Source Strategy, Google Cloud

345 Spear Street, San Francisco, 94105





--
Kris Nova
Chief Open Source Advocate


85 2nd Street
San Francisco, CA 94105


Re: [RESULT] SIG Runtime (Approved)

Quinton Hoole <quinton@...>
 

Awesome!  Thanks to all who contributed to this.

Q


On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 3:25 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
The CNCF SIG Runtime has been approved.

+1 Binding: 7/9
Alexis Richardson: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4006
Matt Klein: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4006
Joe Beda: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4012
Liz Rice: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4032
Brian Grant: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4036
Brendan Burns: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4038
Xiang Li: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4039

+1 Non-binding:
Gou Rao: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4008
Alex Chircop: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4009
Jeyappragash Jeyakeerthi: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4013
Gadi Naor: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4014
Xing Yang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4015
Davanum Srinivas: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4016
Jon Mittlehauser: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4017
Brandon Lum: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4018
Kevin Wang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4019
Ken Owens: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4020
Klaus Ma: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4021
Karl Wehden: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4022
Abdul Aziz: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4023
Mark Peek: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4024
Siddharth Bhadri: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4025
Xu Wang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4026
Leonardo Di Donato: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4027
Nikhita Raghunath: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4028
Philippe Robin: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4029
Rabi Abdel: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4030
Pengfei Ni: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4031
Haining Zhang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4035
Michael Hausenblas: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4040
Kiran Mova: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4041
Cathy Zhang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/4044

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



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...


Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Jeremy Rickard
 

+1 NB, this is great! 

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:49 PM Paris Pittman via Lists.Cncf.Io <parispittman=google.com@...> wrote:
Hi TOC and community,

I'm watching the emails fly by re: maintainer things so figured no time like the present to send this start of a proposal along. I've been working on it for a few weeks and getting input. I think I'm a first-time poster, very-long-time lurker to this list, hello! 

I recently stepped back from my role as co-chair for Kubernetes Contributor Experience Special Interest Group that I held for 2 years. Sarah Novotny, Brian Grant, Phil Wittrock and many(!) others decided that a place for intentional contributor community building was necessary and I'm glad they did. I believe it's the secret sauce but yes - I'm bias. :)

A group like this[1] could help many stakeholders, as outlined in this work-in-progress doc, including engaging the end user community in new ways, and current cncf projects that don't have a ContribEx/CommComm (nod to nodejs). It's important to note in the out-of-scope section, this group isn't going to do the work for your project but will help you get there and learn together. I've spoken to some TOC members and many project maintainers about this. 

Notes:
  • This is a pretty broad charter that should absolutely be trimmed down after formation, discovery, and some other kick off activities. 
  • Left broad as most of the work will depend on the known gaps and the contributors/community members who step forward to help with them.

paris


Re: CNCF SIG Contributor Experience Proposal

Leonardo Di Donato
 

+1 nb
L.


On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 3:20 PM Nicola Marco Decandia <n.decandia@...> wrote:

+1 NB

 

Thanks

 

--- 

/var/folders/t9/633c27117zl1dfcw0dkx1cw00000gn/T/com.microsoft.Outlook/Content.MSO/814E4D66.tmp 

Nicola Marco Decandia
Desotech S.r.l.

+39.0803105224 | +39.3404191066 | n.decandia@...

https://www.desotech.it

Altamura - Roma - Milano

 

2921 - 2940 of 7051