Good points. I love the content ideas, Michelle. Alois suggested a SIG chairs f2f at KubeCon to share ideas if it's possible to find a good time Liz On 8 Nov 2019, 18:53 +0000, Joe Beda <jbeda@...>,

One other angle/comment: We have a model right now a SIG owning some level over oversight over a project. But the mapping may not be that clean. A project may be primarily in a specific space but

Having gone through some of the debates when we first put the SIG charters together, there are a few other considerations I'd like to add to the debate :-) In general I think SIGs should bias towards

Thanks Liz This is exactly the discussion I hoped to spark, so I definitely don't mind your debate :-) Michelle and I happened to have a chat about this today, as she mentioned, and will discuss

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this Liz. I agree with your bullet points especially around acknowledging that there are gaps and that the TOC is responsible when it comes to gaps (was just

I've been mulling over Quinton's comments on the last TOC call about SIGs reducing their scope. SIGs are there to help the TOC scale, with expertise and/or time that the TOC members don't necessarily

It is indeed an interesting paper - metadata management, overwrites vs COW etc ... are all common problems with distributed storage solutions🙂

Okay thanks for clarifying! Standing by if we can help. — Kris Nova Chief Open Source Advocate

https://blog.acolyer.org/2019/11/06/ceph-evolution/ Mboi to storage fans :)

Previously we have had a period of general review, and then set a future date for a vote to ensure people make an effort to get comments in. A bit like preparing for an exam I guess. Keep an eye on

Hey all, Also a quick point of clarification - are we on standby until further notice with a formal vote? Unsure what we mean when we say “set a timeline”? — Kris Nova Chief Open Source

Hey all, Strong +1 with Joe/Alexis Most of the Falco community will be at KubeCon as well if it would be helpful to meet in person to go over anything. Thanks for your time and consideration

Echoing Joe's call and amplifying to the TOC Contributors. With Kubecon around the corner, I am sure almost everyone is jammed. <jbeda=vmware.com@...> wrote:

Hello TOC folks – I’d love to help collect concerns/impressions/questions as we try and set a timeline to get a vote going. Joe From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Michael Ducy

Hi team, We'd like to propose Volcano as CNCF sandbox :) Volcano is a Kubernetes Native Batch System, which provides features to run batch workload (e.g. AI/ML, BigData, HPC) on Kubernetes. Please

TOC members; Joe Beda, assisted by Kris Nova and myself, has completed the technical due diligence for Falco, and we would like to request that a formal vote be held for moving Falco to incubation.

The Vitess project has been approved to the graduated maturity level: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/306 +1 binding TOC votes (6/9): Matt Klein: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3689 Brendan

Hey all, we are meeting

Quinton - Thanks for mentioning SIG-Runtime - I forgot about this suggestion. Do you think CloudEvents would be under SIG-Runtime? It mentioning orchestration and batch seems like it might fit under

SGTM