Date   

Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

Aeva
 

Thanks for the update, Dims! I know these things take the time that they take.

Couple questions, since this is the first I've heard of an "interim code of conduct committee":
- how is the composition of the interim CoCC being decided?
- what process will it follow (modeled after k8s.dev/coc-process or something else)?
- will the interim CoCC be picking up current/ongoing cases, or only handling new cases?is it crashing that fast? :(

Thanks in advance,
--Aeva


On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 10:27 AM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:
Hi Aeva,

Apologies for the delay! Earliest on Tuesday (end of day), worst case - end of next week. 

Please expect 2 things:
- composition of an interim cocc
- composition of the cocc WG 

-- Dims

On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 11:04 AM Aeva <aeva.online@...> wrote:
Hi Dims,

Checking in as it’s been about a week. When should we expect a follow up?

Best,
Aeva


On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 6:48 PM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:
Folks,

FYI. Thanks for all the feedback so far on the WG structure! Please see the update from Arun.

-- Dims

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Gupta, Arun <arun.gupta@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>


To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

We have received a lot of feedback on the proposed Working Group structure. We are taking that into consideration to ensure that there is diversity and inclusion of people and opinions. We appreciate your patience while this is being worked upon. Please stay tuned.

 

Arun

 

From: cncf-gb@... <cncf-gb@...> on behalf of Gupta, Arun <arun.gupta@...>
Date: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 2:33 PM
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

There has been some confusion regarding eligibility to serve as a representative on the Code of Conduct Working Group, so we’re sharing additional details to clarify.  Please see the updated composition list below with clarifications highlighted:


  • Any active Incubating + Graduated Maintainer who wishes to volunteer
  • 1-2 representatives from the Governing Board - must be a primary member, not an alternate
  • 1–2 representatives from the Technical Oversight Committee
  • 1 representative from each TAG - must be a chair or technical lead of the TAG
    • TAG-Security
    • TAG-Storage
    • TAG-App-Delivery
    • TAG-Network
    • TAG-Runtime
    • TAG Contributor Strategy
    • TAG Observability
  • 1 representative from the Kubernetes CoC Committee - must be an active current member
  • 1 representative from the Marketing Committee - must be a chair
  • 2 CNCF staff 
  • 1 LF Events staff
  • External advisors for support

 

If you would like to participate and are eligible per the list above, please notify Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...> no later than June 14. 

 

We apologize for any confusion.

 

Sincerely,

 

Chairs for CNCF Governing Board & Technical Oversight Committee

 

 

From: cncf-gb@... <cncf-gb@...> On Behalf Of Gupta, Arun
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 5:50 PM
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>
Subject: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

 

To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

At KubeCon EU a few weeks ago, CNCF community members and staff came together to discuss making improvements to CNCF’s Code of Conduct (CoC) processes.  CoC process updates will happen in several phases, as described in our recent blog post on Upcoming Code of Conduct Updates at CNCF.  As one important step forward, we are now forming a CNCF Code of Conduct Update Working Group (WG) to continue developing and refining a set of proposed new processes and documentation.  Many thanks to those who have already been working on proposals that will help us move forward.

 

The intended output of this WG is a set of updated policies that can be submitted to the appropriate governing body* for approval, including:

·         Improvements to the CNCF Code of Conduct

·         Charter for a new CNCF CoC Committee 

·         Updated policies regarding communication, confidentiality, & transparency

·         Updated conflict of interest policy

·         Written policy outlining who has jurisdiction of which incidents (LF Events, CNCF CoC Committee, or project-level CoC Committee)

 

Although CNCF has already been operating in accordance with policies of the types listed above, we want to update and better document them through a collaborative community process.

 

*Updates to the Code of Conduct must be approved by the TOC (CNCF Charter §13), but creation of a CoC Committee to handle CoC incident response & resolution must be approved by the Governing Board (CNCF Charter §5(d)(vii)).

 

We are seeking Working Group participants from the following roles:

  • Any active Incubating + Graduated Maintainers who wish to volunteer
  • 1-2 representatives from the Governing Board (GB)
  • 1–2 representatives from the Technical Oversight Committee (TOC)
  • 1 representative from each TAG:
    • TAG-Security
    • TAG-Storage
    • TAG-App-Delivery
    • TAG-Network
    • TAG-Runtime
    • TAG Contributor Strategy
    • TAG Observability
  • 1 representative from the Kubernetes CoC Committee
  • 1 representative from the Marketing Committee
  • 2 CNCF staff 
  • 1 LF Events staff
  • External advisors for support

 

If you are an active Incubated or Graduated Maintainer or belong to one of the governing bodies listed above, and you would like to participate in the Working Group, please notify Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...> no later than June 14.  If there are more volunteers from a governing body than seats allocated, the governing body will select its representative.  The time commitment for WG participants would be 3-6 hours per month for a total of 4-6 months. The WG will have 2 co-chairs, one from TOC and one from the GB side to lead meetings, facilitate consensus, etc. 

 

Feedback from the broader community as well as the Governing Board and TOC will be solicited on a regular basis.  Anyone in the community is welcome to submit proposals (PRs on Github) and may be invited to a WG meeting to present it.  

 

The WG will use a private slack and a public github repository for formalizing content. We will schedule the first WG meeting shortly after the WG participants are confirmed.

 

Sincerely,

 

Chairs for CNCF Governing Board & Technical Oversight Committee

 



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

Davanum Srinivas
 

Hi Aeva,

Apologies for the delay! Earliest on Tuesday (end of day), worst case - end of next week. 

Please expect 2 things:
- composition of an interim cocc
- composition of the cocc WG 

-- Dims


On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 11:04 AM Aeva <aeva.online@...> wrote:
Hi Dims,

Checking in as it’s been about a week. When should we expect a follow up?

Best,
Aeva


On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 6:48 PM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:
Folks,

FYI. Thanks for all the feedback so far on the WG structure! Please see the update from Arun.

-- Dims

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Gupta, Arun <arun.gupta@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>


To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

We have received a lot of feedback on the proposed Working Group structure. We are taking that into consideration to ensure that there is diversity and inclusion of people and opinions. We appreciate your patience while this is being worked upon. Please stay tuned.

 

Arun

 

From: cncf-gb@... <cncf-gb@...> on behalf of Gupta, Arun <arun.gupta@...>
Date: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 2:33 PM
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

There has been some confusion regarding eligibility to serve as a representative on the Code of Conduct Working Group, so we’re sharing additional details to clarify.  Please see the updated composition list below with clarifications highlighted:


  • Any active Incubating + Graduated Maintainer who wishes to volunteer
  • 1-2 representatives from the Governing Board - must be a primary member, not an alternate
  • 1–2 representatives from the Technical Oversight Committee
  • 1 representative from each TAG - must be a chair or technical lead of the TAG
    • TAG-Security
    • TAG-Storage
    • TAG-App-Delivery
    • TAG-Network
    • TAG-Runtime
    • TAG Contributor Strategy
    • TAG Observability
  • 1 representative from the Kubernetes CoC Committee - must be an active current member
  • 1 representative from the Marketing Committee - must be a chair
  • 2 CNCF staff 
  • 1 LF Events staff
  • External advisors for support

 

If you would like to participate and are eligible per the list above, please notify Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...> no later than June 14. 

 

We apologize for any confusion.

 

Sincerely,

 

Chairs for CNCF Governing Board & Technical Oversight Committee

 

 

From: cncf-gb@... <cncf-gb@...> On Behalf Of Gupta, Arun
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 5:50 PM
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>
Subject: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

 

To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

At KubeCon EU a few weeks ago, CNCF community members and staff came together to discuss making improvements to CNCF’s Code of Conduct (CoC) processes.  CoC process updates will happen in several phases, as described in our recent blog post on Upcoming Code of Conduct Updates at CNCF.  As one important step forward, we are now forming a CNCF Code of Conduct Update Working Group (WG) to continue developing and refining a set of proposed new processes and documentation.  Many thanks to those who have already been working on proposals that will help us move forward.

 

The intended output of this WG is a set of updated policies that can be submitted to the appropriate governing body* for approval, including:

·         Improvements to the CNCF Code of Conduct

·         Charter for a new CNCF CoC Committee 

·         Updated policies regarding communication, confidentiality, & transparency

·         Updated conflict of interest policy

·         Written policy outlining who has jurisdiction of which incidents (LF Events, CNCF CoC Committee, or project-level CoC Committee)

 

Although CNCF has already been operating in accordance with policies of the types listed above, we want to update and better document them through a collaborative community process.

 

*Updates to the Code of Conduct must be approved by the TOC (CNCF Charter §13), but creation of a CoC Committee to handle CoC incident response & resolution must be approved by the Governing Board (CNCF Charter §5(d)(vii)).

 

We are seeking Working Group participants from the following roles:

  • Any active Incubating + Graduated Maintainers who wish to volunteer
  • 1-2 representatives from the Governing Board (GB)
  • 1–2 representatives from the Technical Oversight Committee (TOC)
  • 1 representative from each TAG:
    • TAG-Security
    • TAG-Storage
    • TAG-App-Delivery
    • TAG-Network
    • TAG-Runtime
    • TAG Contributor Strategy
    • TAG Observability
  • 1 representative from the Kubernetes CoC Committee
  • 1 representative from the Marketing Committee
  • 2 CNCF staff 
  • 1 LF Events staff
  • External advisors for support

 

If you are an active Incubated or Graduated Maintainer or belong to one of the governing bodies listed above, and you would like to participate in the Working Group, please notify Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...> no later than June 14.  If there are more volunteers from a governing body than seats allocated, the governing body will select its representative.  The time commitment for WG participants would be 3-6 hours per month for a total of 4-6 months. The WG will have 2 co-chairs, one from TOC and one from the GB side to lead meetings, facilitate consensus, etc. 

 

Feedback from the broader community as well as the Governing Board and TOC will be solicited on a regular basis.  Anyone in the community is welcome to submit proposals (PRs on Github) and may be invited to a WG meeting to present it.  

 

The WG will use a private slack and a public github repository for formalizing content. We will schedule the first WG meeting shortly after the WG participants are confirmed.

 

Sincerely,

 

Chairs for CNCF Governing Board & Technical Oversight Committee

 



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

Aeva
 

Hi Dims,

Checking in as it’s been about a week. When should we expect a follow up?

Best,
Aeva


On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 6:48 PM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:
Folks,

FYI. Thanks for all the feedback so far on the WG structure! Please see the update from Arun.

-- Dims

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Gupta, Arun <arun.gupta@...>
Date: Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>


To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

We have received a lot of feedback on the proposed Working Group structure. We are taking that into consideration to ensure that there is diversity and inclusion of people and opinions. We appreciate your patience while this is being worked upon. Please stay tuned.

 

Arun

 

From: cncf-gb@... <cncf-gb@...> on behalf of Gupta, Arun <arun.gupta@...>
Date: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 2:33 PM
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

There has been some confusion regarding eligibility to serve as a representative on the Code of Conduct Working Group, so we’re sharing additional details to clarify.  Please see the updated composition list below with clarifications highlighted:


  • Any active Incubating + Graduated Maintainer who wishes to volunteer
  • 1-2 representatives from the Governing Board - must be a primary member, not an alternate
  • 1–2 representatives from the Technical Oversight Committee
  • 1 representative from each TAG - must be a chair or technical lead of the TAG
    • TAG-Security
    • TAG-Storage
    • TAG-App-Delivery
    • TAG-Network
    • TAG-Runtime
    • TAG Contributor Strategy
    • TAG Observability
  • 1 representative from the Kubernetes CoC Committee - must be an active current member
  • 1 representative from the Marketing Committee - must be a chair
  • 2 CNCF staff 
  • 1 LF Events staff
  • External advisors for support

 

If you would like to participate and are eligible per the list above, please notify Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...> no later than June 14. 

 

We apologize for any confusion.

 

Sincerely,

 

Chairs for CNCF Governing Board & Technical Oversight Committee

 

 

From: cncf-gb@... <cncf-gb@...> On Behalf Of Gupta, Arun
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 5:50 PM
To: cncf-gb <cncf-gb@...>
Cc: Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...>
Subject: [cncf-gb] Formation of CNCF CoC Update Working Group

 

To members of the CNCF Governing Board:

 

At KubeCon EU a few weeks ago, CNCF community members and staff came together to discuss making improvements to CNCF’s Code of Conduct (CoC) processes.  CoC process updates will happen in several phases, as described in our recent blog post on Upcoming Code of Conduct Updates at CNCF.  As one important step forward, we are now forming a CNCF Code of Conduct Update Working Group (WG) to continue developing and refining a set of proposed new processes and documentation.  Many thanks to those who have already been working on proposals that will help us move forward.

 

The intended output of this WG is a set of updated policies that can be submitted to the appropriate governing body* for approval, including:

·         Improvements to the CNCF Code of Conduct

·         Charter for a new CNCF CoC Committee 

·         Updated policies regarding communication, confidentiality, & transparency

·         Updated conflict of interest policy

·         Written policy outlining who has jurisdiction of which incidents (LF Events, CNCF CoC Committee, or project-level CoC Committee)

 

Although CNCF has already been operating in accordance with policies of the types listed above, we want to update and better document them through a collaborative community process.

 

*Updates to the Code of Conduct must be approved by the TOC (CNCF Charter §13), but creation of a CoC Committee to handle CoC incident response & resolution must be approved by the Governing Board (CNCF Charter §5(d)(vii)).

 

We are seeking Working Group participants from the following roles:

  • Any active Incubating + Graduated Maintainers who wish to volunteer
  • 1-2 representatives from the Governing Board (GB)
  • 1–2 representatives from the Technical Oversight Committee (TOC)
  • 1 representative from each TAG:
    • TAG-Security
    • TAG-Storage
    • TAG-App-Delivery
    • TAG-Network
    • TAG-Runtime
    • TAG Contributor Strategy
    • TAG Observability
  • 1 representative from the Kubernetes CoC Committee
  • 1 representative from the Marketing Committee
  • 2 CNCF staff 
  • 1 LF Events staff
  • External advisors for support

 

If you are an active Incubated or Graduated Maintainer or belong to one of the governing bodies listed above, and you would like to participate in the Working Group, please notify Taylor Waggoner <twaggoner@...> no later than June 14.  If there are more volunteers from a governing body than seats allocated, the governing body will select its representative.  The time commitment for WG participants would be 3-6 hours per month for a total of 4-6 months. The WG will have 2 co-chairs, one from TOC and one from the GB side to lead meetings, facilitate consensus, etc. 

 

Feedback from the broader community as well as the Governing Board and TOC will be solicited on a regular basis.  Anyone in the community is welcome to submit proposals (PRs on Github) and may be invited to a WG meeting to present it.  

 

The WG will use a private slack and a public github repository for formalizing content. We will schedule the first WG meeting shortly after the WG participants are confirmed.

 

Sincerely,

 

Chairs for CNCF Governing Board & Technical Oversight Committee

 



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: [VOTE] Kyverno for incubation

Hongcai Ren
 

+1 NB


Re: [VOTE] Kyverno for incubation

Paulo Simoes
 

+1 NB


Re: Request for Comment: Mentoring WG

Davanum Srinivas
 

works! thanks.


On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 1:49 PM Josh Berkus <jberkus@...> wrote:
On 6/17/22 07:53, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> So let's please go ahead and file a PR and we can do what we usually do
> to start a WG.
>

I think we need to wait until Tuesday.  Then a PR will be coming.

--
-- Josh Berkus
    Kubernetes Community Architect
    OSPO, OCTO



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: Request for Comment: Mentoring WG

Josh Berkus
 

On 6/17/22 07:53, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
So let's please go ahead and file a PR and we can do what we usually do to start a WG.
I think we need to wait until Tuesday. Then a PR will be coming.

--
-- Josh Berkus
Kubernetes Community Architect
OSPO, OCTO


Re: Request for Comment: Mentoring WG

Davanum Srinivas
 

Josh,

Got back to this finally. Thanks for floating this WG. I like both the scope and goals. We can always iterate and update depending on who shows up to do the work etc.

So let's please go ahead and file a PR and we can do what we usually do to start a WG.

thanks,
Dims


On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 10:40 AM Josh Berkus <jberkus@...> wrote:
TOC:

TAG Contributor Strategy would like to create the Mentoring Working
Group, under our TAG.

You can find, and comment on, a draft charter here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B_hpVAKxxNaSgVYAsHdjq_57eZEkYUuxcxecbcl3H9c/edit?usp=sharing

The Mentoring WG is a home for organized mentoring activity that was
already happening in the CNCF.  It was originally requested by Ihor
before he became unavailable, and will be led by CNCF staff and
contractors; particularly Nate Waddington (CNCF) and Jay Tihema (ii) to
start. They hope to recruit additional WG contributors from our
community, of course, and a few have tentatively stepped up per the charter.

Right now Mentoring is a Team inside TAG-CS, and we've already begun
work on several initiatives, including LFX, GSOC, GSOD, Outreachy, and a
new effort to make students in NZ aware of internship opportunities in
the CNCF.

The latter will include creation of an indigenous pilot programme to
launch among regional education providers; and career and resource
development in collaboration with stakeholders in community, education,
industry and local government.

We expect learning gained from this approach will help to identify and
bridge suitable candidates into the various mentoring opportunities
available, and act as a framework that can be applied to other groups
globally.

--
-- Josh Berkus, TAG-CS Chair
    Dawn Foster, TAG-CS Chair
    Jay Tihema, Mentoring Team Lead
    Nate Waddington, Mentoring Team Lead








--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: Results from Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, 6/14

Davanum Srinivas
 

This specific one was more of a question rather than a hard request that needed work. so all that was needed was a quick chat to sort it out. 

Yes, if there was a specific task, then we should open an issue to track.

thanks,
Dims


On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 8:52 PM Josh Berkus <jberkus@...> wrote:
On 6/16/22 17:43, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> instead of the recording or in addition to the zoom recording?

In addition.

--
-- Josh Berkus
    Kubernetes Community Architect
    OSPO, OCTO








--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: Results from Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, 6/14

Josh Berkus
 

On 6/16/22 17:43, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
instead of the recording or in addition to the zoom recording?
In addition.

--
-- Josh Berkus
Kubernetes Community Architect
OSPO, OCTO


Re: Results from Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, 6/14

Davanum Srinivas
 

Josh,

instead of the recording or in addition to the zoom recording?


On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 8:41 PM Josh Berkus <jberkus@...> wrote:
On 6/14/22 17:20, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Please review the recording https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I
> <https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I> you will hear us talk about the section
> in the main README that says to contact you directly via email. it may
> be good to point to the contributing markdown file instead etc. i've
> added you in the #toc channel for follow up.
>

Can I suggest again that this kind of feedback get created as an issue
in the TOC repo, so that everyone can track it better?

--
-- Josh Berkus
    Kubernetes Community Architect
    OSPO, OCTO



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: Results from Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, 6/14

Josh Berkus
 

On 6/14/22 17:20, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Please review the recording https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I <https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I> you will hear us talk about the section in the main README that says to contact you directly via email. it may be good to point to the contributing markdown file instead etc. i've added you in the #toc channel for follow up.
Can I suggest again that this kind of feedback get created as an issue in the TOC repo, so that everyone can track it better?

--
-- Josh Berkus
Kubernetes Community Architect
OSPO, OCTO


Re: [VOTE] Kyverno for incubation

Matt Farina
 

+1 binding

On Wed, May 25, 2022, at 2:00 PM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:
Kyverno has applied to move to the incubation level.



Davanum Srinivas is the TOC sponsor for this project, has called for public comment and has approved a call for a public vote. (https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/6859)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread.

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 | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...


Re: [VOTE] Kyverno for incubation

Lei Zhang
 

+1 binding

On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 11:01 AM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
Kyverno has applied to move to the incubation level.

PR: PR: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/784

Due Diligence doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18dWgOd2MUQz3RXI1R9vKntL3ULyZhOD1HEtijGOeaWg/edit?usp=sharing

Davanum Srinivas is the TOC sponsor for this project, has called for public comment and has approved a call for a public vote. (https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/6859)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread.

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 | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...


Re: Results from Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, 6/14

Huabing Zhao
 

Great, thanks! 


On Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 8:20 AM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:
Huabing Zhao,

Please review the recording https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I you will hear us talk about the section in the main README that says to contact you directly via email. it may be good to point to the contributing markdown file instead etc. i've added you in the #toc channel for follow up.

-- Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 7:21 PM Huabing Zhao <zhaohuabing@...> wrote:
Hi Davanum, Amye,

I noticed that there's a to-do for Aeraki Mesh. Should I reach out to someone to proceed?

Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines

Thanks,

Huabing 

On Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 1:25 AM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:
Folks,

Please ping us on #toc channel or drop an email to the toc or private-toc mailing list if you have any questions after reviewing the video of the zoom call today. Please don't mind the short abbreviated response here, you will hear more of our concerns on the recording.

thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:16 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
The TOC met today to review the sandbox applications available at sandbox.cncf.io

  • Clusterpedia  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Turnbuckle  - reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community: K8s wg-batch, sig-scheduling, sig-security
  • pallet  -  reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community
  • OpenCost - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, suggest engaging with the environmental sustainability WG
  • Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines
  • Curve - passes with a majority vote of the TOC,  will need license exception approval from the GB
  • OpenFeature -   passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • kubewarden - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Hidra - will need to be relicensed, reapply in 6 months
  • DevStream  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Hexa Policy Orchestration - present to TAG Security for clarity, IDQL language is unclear

July 26th is our next Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, we'll pick up from where we left off! 

--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: Policy question: What happens when projects merge?

Nick Young
 

Thanks everyone for the reminders about OpenTracing and OpenTelemetry, I had completely forgotten about that merge! I'd definitely be interested in hearing more from anyone involved in that either here, or via direct email or Slack DM if you want to talk about it.

Thanks for the response as well Dims, I'm glad we agree on the path forward.

Very interested to hear if anyone else has differing opinions still though!

Nick

On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 at 07:06, Evan Anderson <evana@...> wrote:
The OpenTracing and OpenCensus communities seem to have blazed the way here with OpenTelemetry -- I don't know if they have any learnings that they'd want to share about what worked well, or what could have been done better.

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Davanum Srinivas via lists.cncf.io <davanum=gmail.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 3:27 AM
To: Nick Young <inocuo@...>
Cc: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] Policy question: What happens when projects merge?
 

⚠ External Email

Nick,

Thanks for reaching out. One of the main objectives of the process is to give assurance to the end users of CNCF projects that we as a community stand behind the projects they are using (esp graduated ones). So we cannot do this in good faith for Contour. So my feeling is that we should leave contour where it is now, put the effort on the replacement, figure out docs (esp migration etc) and slowly wean the community off contour onto the new replacement which is Envoy Gateway.

thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:15 AM Nick Young <inocuo@...> wrote:

Hi TOC, and everyone else,


With the successful launch of Envoy Gateway, there's a question about what to do about Contour's lifecycle as an incubated project in the CNCF.


I firmly believe that Envoy Gateway's launch is a huge win for the cloud native landscape, and the deduplication of effort possible by having us all working together will prove worthwhile once we get something built.


Normally, there's a (reasonable) requirement for incubating projects to show motion in the direction of becoming graduated, and a timeline to become graduated. But it seems to me that graduation implies a level of "this will be supported for the foreseeable future" that I don't know is viable for Contour.


VMware has committed to ensuring our maintenance of the project will be ongoing until users are ready to move away, see [our blog](https://blogs.vmware.com/opensource/2022/05/16/contour-and-community-build-new-envoy-gateway/) for more details. To summarize that blog, Contour's VMware maintainers will be helping to ensure that current users of Contour are looked after with features and support as long as possible, Wearing my Contour maintainer hat, we're an incubating project that will, within the next year or two, be mostly obsoleted by a functional, production-ready Envoy Gateway.  This implies that I need to figure out what we're going to do about Contour's incubation status.


The scenario I had assumed is that Contour may not graduate, and personally this makes me a little sad, but I recognize the larger opportunity that Envoy Gateway represents for the cloud native community. I know this situation hasn't come up before, but I suspect that this won't be the last time that CNCF projects interact in this fashion. I’d definitely like the TOC’s guidance here rather than making assumptions though.


Should Contour stay in incubating until Envoy Gateway is a viable alternative and users have moved away, then be archived? The timeline for this I would see as at least two years.


I personally see this as a successful exit for Contour, and have heard it referred to as "the open-source version of being acquired", but it would be nice for the TOC to give both us and other projects who may run into this situation in the future some guidance here.


Thanks for your time, everyone!


Nick Young

Wearing two of my maintainer hats for this email (Contour and Envoy Gateway).




--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


⚠ External Email: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.


Re: Results from Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, 6/14

Davanum Srinivas
 

Huabing Zhao,

Please review the recording https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I you will hear us talk about the section in the main README that says to contact you directly via email. it may be good to point to the contributing markdown file instead etc. i've added you in the #toc channel for follow up.

-- Dims


On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 7:21 PM Huabing Zhao <zhaohuabing@...> wrote:
Hi Davanum, Amye,

I noticed that there's a to-do for Aeraki Mesh. Should I reach out to someone to proceed?

Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines

Thanks,

Huabing 

On Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 1:25 AM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:
Folks,

Please ping us on #toc channel or drop an email to the toc or private-toc mailing list if you have any questions after reviewing the video of the zoom call today. Please don't mind the short abbreviated response here, you will hear more of our concerns on the recording.

thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:16 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
The TOC met today to review the sandbox applications available at sandbox.cncf.io

  • Clusterpedia  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Turnbuckle  - reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community: K8s wg-batch, sig-scheduling, sig-security
  • pallet  -  reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community
  • OpenCost - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, suggest engaging with the environmental sustainability WG
  • Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines
  • Curve - passes with a majority vote of the TOC,  will need license exception approval from the GB
  • OpenFeature -   passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • kubewarden - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Hidra - will need to be relicensed, reapply in 6 months
  • DevStream  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Hexa Policy Orchestration - present to TAG Security for clarity, IDQL language is unclear

July 26th is our next Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, we'll pick up from where we left off! 

--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: Results from Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, 6/14

Huabing Zhao
 

Hi Davanum, Amye,

I noticed that there's a to-do for Aeraki Mesh. Should I reach out to someone to proceed?

Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines

Thanks,

Huabing 

On Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 1:25 AM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:
Folks,

Please ping us on #toc channel or drop an email to the toc or private-toc mailing list if you have any questions after reviewing the video of the zoom call today. Please don't mind the short abbreviated response here, you will hear more of our concerns on the recording.

thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:16 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
The TOC met today to review the sandbox applications available at sandbox.cncf.io

  • Clusterpedia  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Turnbuckle  - reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community: K8s wg-batch, sig-scheduling, sig-security
  • pallet  -  reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community
  • OpenCost - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, suggest engaging with the environmental sustainability WG
  • Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines
  • Curve - passes with a majority vote of the TOC,  will need license exception approval from the GB
  • OpenFeature -   passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • kubewarden - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Hidra - will need to be relicensed, reapply in 6 months
  • DevStream  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Hexa Policy Orchestration - present to TAG Security for clarity, IDQL language is unclear

July 26th is our next Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, we'll pick up from where we left off! 

--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims


Re: Policy question: What happens when projects merge?

Evan Anderson
 

The OpenTracing and OpenCensus communities seem to have blazed the way here with OpenTelemetry -- I don't know if they have any learnings that they'd want to share about what worked well, or what could have been done better.


From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Davanum Srinivas via lists.cncf.io <davanum=gmail.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 3:27 AM
To: Nick Young <inocuo@...>
Cc: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] Policy question: What happens when projects merge?
 
Nick,

Thanks for reaching out. One of the main objectives of the process is to give assurance to the end users of CNCF projects that we as a community stand behind the projects they are using (esp graduated ones). So we cannot do this in good faith for Contour. So my feeling is that we should leave contour where it is now, put the effort on the replacement, figure out docs (esp migration etc) and slowly wean the community off contour onto the new replacement which is Envoy Gateway.

thanks,
Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:15 AM Nick Young <inocuo@...> wrote:

Hi TOC, and everyone else,


With the successful launch of Envoy Gateway, there's a question about what to do about Contour's lifecycle as an incubated project in the CNCF.


I firmly believe that Envoy Gateway's launch is a huge win for the cloud native landscape, and the deduplication of effort possible by having us all working together will prove worthwhile once we get something built.


Normally, there's a (reasonable) requirement for incubating projects to show motion in the direction of becoming graduated, and a timeline to become graduated. But it seems to me that graduation implies a level of "this will be supported for the foreseeable future" that I don't know is viable for Contour.


VMware has committed to ensuring our maintenance of the project will be ongoing until users are ready to move away, see [our blog](https://blogs.vmware.com/opensource/2022/05/16/contour-and-community-build-new-envoy-gateway/) for more details. To summarize that blog, Contour's VMware maintainers will be helping to ensure that current users of Contour are looked after with features and support as long as possible, Wearing my Contour maintainer hat, we're an incubating project that will, within the next year or two, be mostly obsoleted by a functional, production-ready Envoy Gateway.  This implies that I need to figure out what we're going to do about Contour's incubation status.


The scenario I had assumed is that Contour may not graduate, and personally this makes me a little sad, but I recognize the larger opportunity that Envoy Gateway represents for the cloud native community. I know this situation hasn't come up before, but I suspect that this won't be the last time that CNCF projects interact in this fashion. I’d definitely like the TOC’s guidance here rather than making assumptions though.


Should Contour stay in incubating until Envoy Gateway is a viable alternative and users have moved away, then be archived? The timeline for this I would see as at least two years.


I personally see this as a successful exit for Contour, and have heard it referred to as "the open-source version of being acquired", but it would be nice for the TOC to give both us and other projects who may run into this situation in the future some guidance here.


Thanks for your time, everyone!


Nick Young

Wearing two of my maintainer hats for this email (Contour and Envoy Gateway).




--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims



Re: Results from Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, 6/14

Davanum Srinivas
 

Folks,

Please ping us on #toc channel or drop an email to the toc or private-toc mailing list if you have any questions after reviewing the video of the zoom call today. Please don't mind the short abbreviated response here, you will hear more of our concerns on the recording.

thanks,
Dims


On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:16 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
The TOC met today to review the sandbox applications available at sandbox.cncf.io

  • Clusterpedia  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Turnbuckle  - reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community: K8s wg-batch, sig-scheduling, sig-security
  • pallet  -  reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community
  • OpenCost - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, suggest engaging with the environmental sustainability WG
  • Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines
  • Curve - passes with a majority vote of the TOC,  will need license exception approval from the GB
  • OpenFeature -   passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • kubewarden - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Hidra - will need to be relicensed, reapply in 6 months
  • DevStream  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
  • Hexa Policy Orchestration - present to TAG Security for clarity, IDQL language is unclear

July 26th is our next Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, we'll pick up from where we left off! 

--
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims

401 - 420 of 7547