On the last TOC call there was a call to look at updating the graduation requirements and also to look at the various CII levels: https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues/196 One idea was to potentially

Hi TOC The document has been moved to a PR: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/194 Chris, it looks like we need to do a few updates on our GitHub repo to reflect the new TOC members – the list is out

Thanks. I posted a link to the review presentation and project health dashboard to the PR. A link to the CII badge status details is also in the PR. TOC members: PTAL and ask questions if there is

+1 -- Cheers, Chris Aniszczyk http://aniszczyk.org +1 512 961 6719

Could we please push that out a week? A week isn't a sufficient amount of time for any serious diligence.

Hey all, now that we have a newly formed TOC, we are back to tackling backlog of project/graduation requests. At the TOC call today, we discussed that containerd will be next and offer a week of

From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of <Li> Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 09:28 To: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...> Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF SIGs Proposal Quinton> Yes, that’s the intention,

Xiang, Below: I don't think that's a "MUST HAVE", but it would be Nice. Well, one aim of all this is that SIGs help to identify project gaps for CNCF, and some of the pre-solicitation and

Thanks for putting this together! I have a few questions and comments on the proposal. Questions: 1. Does every existing CNCF project need to be assigned to a SIG? 2. Does every candidate project

Right. Operator is a concept, better to be put in the Area column. Operator framework is a generic framework project, which can be a potential project in the generic app dev, ops, testing SIG. For

Quinton et al, I was just thinking of "Operators" as a generic term much like "PaaS" is on App Dev, Ops & Testing SIG areas list rather than specifically calling out Operator Framework. Diane --

Here's our annual report for last year: https://www.cncf.io/cncf-annual-report-2018/ Tweet away: https://twitter.com/CloudNativeFdn/status/1092544807900110848 We'll discuss it briefly on tomorrow's

Here's the agenda and deck for tomorrow: - Congrats CoreDNS on CNCF Graduation! - FYI: CNCF Annual Report - TOC Election 2019 Results! - CNCF TOC Seat opens March 2019:

Yes, although I think that operators themselves will probably also be discussed in most of the SIG’s, as they’re a general-purpose automation mechanism, and may be applied anywhere. So

Quinton et al, Would it be acceptable to add"Operators" to list of areas covered in the App Dev, Ops & Testing - "Area" column? As we get asked a lot which Kubernetes SIG this topic falls into. I know

Agreed that this should likely be left up to the chartering process, but Oversight to me says “management”. So something like a steering committee or advisory board, not necessary related to

For what it’s worth, I poked around in some dictionaries and thesauri, and am now even more convinced that you’re all right and Governance is not the best term. Succinct alternatives seem fairly

I fully expect some of the SIG names to be wordsmithed by the TOC Liaison, Chairs and other interested parties of that SIG during the chartering process, where the more detailed scope of the SIG will

"Security and Compliance" is a good name. I would not limit it just to "Security". Rapidly evolving cloud environments do require governance, and there is a broad range of policies that need to be

+1 to Security & Compliance over Governance (Which will get abbreviated to SecComp and then everyone will think there’s a SIG on seccomp profiles. :)