Hi, We have prepared the content for the first topic in the list (albeit a little later than we hoped for). This is the first doc we have produced and is meant to serve as an overview of storage

All, An agenda item for the TOC f2f was the possible formation of "working groups". These have come up a number of times in the last 9+ months since the TOC formed. The idea is to spawn CNCF TOC

Andy, thanks, sure we should follow w “How” after the “Why” Another reason for that order is to set the architecture context, e.g. many still view containers as lightweight VMs, can see

I agree the emphasis of our outbound messaging should be on the why (and the "what's in it for me?"). And Yaron's suggestion of "because it gets you business agility through continuous dev and ops")

If anyone care to watch Simon’s talk pointed by Tony: "people don't buyWHAT you do, but WHY you do it", Containers, micro-services, .. are thewhat, my point is we should focus on the Why i.e.

I agree with some earlier comments about being too opinionated. A broad definition could be "a computing environment focused on optimizing for applications in cloud operating models". This feels like

+1 That's very concrete, and provides a framework for explaining what and why.

+1 for Thursdays at the same time. - Lee

As a big fan of Joe Beta and Craig McLuckie, my three ingredients for cloud-native operations are containers, orchestrators and microservice frameworks. These three terms come from Craig's post

I think the key message of Cloud-Native should be about its value: Continuous Development and Operation (Enabling Business Agility/Transformation) Decomposition to micro-services, stateless,

Management includes scaling, so IMO "dynamically managed" implies dynamic scaling, as well as a higher rate of change than people had been accustomed to in the past. In practice, the way this is

+1 (non-binding) Regards, Tony Hsu

Either works for me -- Nicholas Weaver Director - Software Engineering Intel, Datacenter Solutions Group From: <cncf-toc-bounces@...> on behalf of Camille Fournier via cncf-toc

I'm flexible

These times/days would work for me, thanks.

+1 (non-binding) -William

Greetings, FWIW: Thursday is problematic for me, Tuesday is better. Would prefer actually earlier in the AM as discussed, 08:00 on the US west coast is problematic (as it locks me at home, and I

I agree with your priorities and time. Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

We have the marketing committee meetings on Tuesdays at the same time, so Thursday would be my preference if we are sticking to the same time. Best, Swarna. On Feb 16, 2017, 11:53 AM -0800, Jonathan

I am OK with either Tuesday or Thursday and would also have a strong preference to keep the same time. thanks, Jonathan