FWIW that article is not 100% correct. Linkerd ships with a control plane (Namerd). This is how these companies are controlling routing policy across Linkerd instances. -William

Yes, this is simply "let's keep this project going" decision. It's in two steps because I'd like to queue up multiple projects to be reviewed to graduate/move to the next level in one TOC call. I'd

"Why are we doing this in 2 steps? This is just a "yes, we want to keep the project" decision?" agreed, Chris, what's your thinking here? <briangrant=google.com@...> wrote:

In general, I'd like to link to devstats dashboards in these types of reviews, so we can see the trajectory. For

Different projects make different design tradeoffs. Also, these 2 projects aren't directly comparable. This article explains the difference pretty

CNCF allows for competing projects, see our TOC principles for more information on this: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/PRINCIPLES.md#no-kingmakers--one-size-does-not-fit-all Istio currently

Hi Chris, Personally, I would like to get clarification of competing component: linkerd vs istio. I learnt for example one company I met in KubeCon converting from linkerd to

Hey TOC and community, we are requesting a vote to keep linkerd (https://github.com/linkerd/linkerd) as an inception project for another year based on their presentation yesterday. Here are some stats

Good idea

Chris, Dan, To Brian's comment - "I think there's an opportunity for help from TOC contributors with these types of reviews, to pre-review the information provided, ask questions about project health

The application specifically addressed the graduation criteria, which was helpful. I posted some links to some stats relating to project health and contributor diversity. The incubation criteria also

First off, happy 2018! Second, here's the deck for tomorrow: https://goo.gl/5wBe3d We plan to cover the existing project proposals + deciding on calling for a vote for the ones that have received

Thanks Chris for the quick reply. I have booked 30 minutes next Friday morning at 10 am and will have the github issue ready before then.

Hey Steve, you can book a time with me to chat here about the project proposal process: calendly.com/caniszczyk I also recommend filing a GitHub issue about your project with more information:

Hi, I am the author of light-4j which is a fast, lightweight and cloud native microservices framework built on top of Java 8 SE. I am considering to join CNCF and wondering if someone can be a sponsor

here is the doc https://docs.google.com/a/synadia.com/document/d/1s9wPNq_BvObnqxySR_ByaPCbs-Y1GB5tI7zoBvAF3nQ/edit?usp=sharing I would be grateful if people from this list could now consider it open

In the last message on the email thread on this in November it was mentioned that there were still some outstanding todo’s before the doc could be considered ready of due diligence review. Some of

no, you have to remove yourself.

maybe, nonetheless we are using a g/doc currently

Wouldn’t it be preferable to do the preparation of the proposal in a Google Doc, and then commence the actual due diligence exercise with a PR (the way most of the other proposals have worked)?