I like this very much. I have been in this hole and it's highly-nonobvious that this was even happening, or what, initially, to do about it. This could also be part of CloudNativeCons, though I am

Thanks for bringing this up Matt. I agree many open source maintainers feel this way and we need to talk more about sustainable processes and expectations. We do have a maintainers mailing list but I

The maintainer of a popular Rust project quit this morning and took down the project. Buried in the post mortem: If you maintain something that gets popular this is bound to happen. I appreciate that

Haven’t had a chance - I was on holidays myself which is why I didn’t jump back into this and other threads earlier earlier. Fresh thoughts as I return with a clear head. :) I will be in SIG App

Gerred IMO that is very fair comment; and not far from what the TOC is currently hoping to do. Have you spoken with any TOC members or SIG leads about how best to get from here to there? alexis

I feel that it’s less like the process is broken, but rather the perception the TOC is putting forth (by way of SIGs and increasing requirements) is that the process must scale and there’s

Vinod Thanks for clarifying that. Normally when people say "partial" they imply agency. I think you are saying that the Process is not clear and (to your eyes) may be broken. Can I ask please: are

Hi Alex, I am not accusing anyone. I am interested in more open-source projects joining the CNCF ecosystem and at the same time, improving the growth and health of those projects. I believe the

Vinod Who are you accusing of being partial. Alexis

Thank you very much to all who were courageous enough to speak about the partiality. At some point, I felt I was a mad person. @Matt, thank you very much for your input. I hope that the TOC will

Absolutely - acknowledged! And believe me we really are working to try to address this. Getting the SIGs set up is intended to help us scale, and we are working to streamline the process, document

I have done a lot of the work for Helm when it comes to CNCF processes. There has been little to no guidance or involvement (other than official level meeting criteria). You have to want it, figure it

I think it could be good to acknowledge the frustration. There are open sandbox proposals that are many months old (including one from January a year ago). Sandbox projects are scheduled to demo in a

Hi Liz, Thanks for clarifying. This was something that I was still fuzzy on as we have been having active discussions on how to streamline the sandbox process to provide more certainty and faster

I agree with Gerred on this one. Coming from someone driving a project without direct CNCF involvement getting the project to incubation took serious work and a very serious diligence. I know contour

Hello, Two corrections here: 1) contour is looking at incubation and will be working through the sig. 2) the question here is about how we are utilizing sigs for projects that already have sponsors.

Vinod The reason I am happy to sponsor Contour is because my team has used it and think it is of a very high quality. I do not need to see a presentation to reach that decision. Regardless of what

I also agree with Gerred about the recent submission. Many of you may have missed it as the project got sponsored super fast. Every project coming to join the CNCF family should be treated fairly.

Glad to see we are all on the same page for Contour. More generally I think all projects should go through the SIG process for Sandbox even if there is already tentative support from the TOC: - We

Oh I see the conversation you mean, about Contour. I’ll reply on that thread. -- Liz Rice @lizrice | lizrice.com | +44 (0) 780 126 1145