Welcome. Great news!

Excited to officially have you onboard, Ihor! -- Shawn Preissner Integrated Marketing Manager The Linux Foundation Cell: +1 (919)257-9591 Web: cncf.io and cncf.io/events Sign up for our

I second Patrick's comments!! Welcome!! Regards, Doug On Sep 18, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Patrick Chanezon via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:

Cool! Welcome Ihor! Rob

Welcome, Ihor!!! So happy to have you on the team :) Annie Fisher, MPA CSM Program Manager, The Linux Foundation Location & Time-zone: San Francisco, CA, PT web:

Excellent choice: good luck in your new role Ihor! P@

Congrats Ihor! On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 10:03 AM, Sebastien Goasguen via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote: -- Xu Wang CTO & Cofounder, Hyper github/twitter/wechat:

Great pick, Congrats Ihor ! (now we know were you landed) -- Sebastien Goasguen Senior Director of Cloud Technologies, Bitnami +41 79 367 38 25 @sebgoa

Welcome! -- Sarah Conway Senior Director of PR Services The Linux Foundation sconway@... (978) 578-5300 Cell Skype: sarah.k.conway

Just a heads up, I'm happy to welcome Ihor Dvoretskyi to the CNCF: https://www.cncf.io/blog/2017/09/18/meet-cncfs-newest-developer-advocate/ As many of you are aware, CNCF has grown quite a bit over

Thanks Dan All, please do take a last look over the g/doc comments. If you see discussion there that you feel is not in GH or still unresolved, please update the GH doc. Alexis

I took the TOC Principles document created by several TOC members and: 1. Converted it to markdown. 2. Left out the notes and comments on the budget. The notes and comments are important (and remain

Would it make sense to also highlight “CNCF Member” projects, distinct from “CNCF Project”s? The former much less prominently than the latter of course. For example: Oracle Database Amazon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_management https://square.github.io/keywhiz/ https://lyft.github.io/confidant/ https://medium.com/@Pinterest_Engineering/open-sourcing-knox-a-secret-key-management-se

In the next version, we'll rename Public cloud to cloud and put the bare metal category next to the public cloud one. That's done on 0.9.7, along with identifying Jaeger and Envoy as CNCF

Big +1 on this request from Brian, particularly from the perspective of MAAS (Metal as a Service), as well as OpenStack, VMware, et al. Those all definitely make more logical sense at the base level,

Coming back to this: Please move Openstack, VMWare, and the other private cloud platforms back to the bottom. Bare metal should be side by side with public clouds, not in the provisioning

If it would be useful I'd like to introduce the periodic table of cloud native elements I've been driving with several of our members. It's intend is to provide an elemental view of cloud outcomes,

Can we make the 2-D one more generic with drill downs for the online version that articulate all the products? I love that it highlights choices, but it should be able to provide an illustrative

Personally I think it highlights the freedom of choice. Yes it is complex and there are many decisions to make but don't we have to do that with any complex architecture we are trying to build? I