|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1
--brendan
By
Brendan Burns
·
#3081
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 nb
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>
Date: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 at 9:30 AM
To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 nb
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>
Date: Tuesday, March 26, 2019 at 9:30 AM
To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
|
By
Geri Jennings
·
#3080
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 (non-binding)
By
Justin Cappos
·
#3079
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 (non-binding)
By
Ayrat Khayretdinov <akhayretdinov@...>
·
#3078
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 non-binding, from policy wg we are really glad OPA has made such great progress :)
--
Zhipeng (Howard) Huang
Principle Engineer
OpenStack, Kubernetes, CNCF, LF Edge, ONNX, Kubeflow, OpenSDS, Open
+1 non-binding, from policy wg we are really glad OPA has made such great progress :)
--
Zhipeng (Howard) Huang
Principle Engineer
OpenStack, Kubernetes, CNCF, LF Edge, ONNX, Kubeflow, OpenSDS, Open
|
By
Zhipeng Huang
·
#3077
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] CNCF SIGs Proposal
+1 non-binding
By
Ken Owens
·
#3076
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 non-binding.
Just as I finally get around to providing requested feedback this morning… the vote goes out. JIT feedback.
- Lee
+1 non-binding.
Just as I finally get around to providing requested feedback this morning… the vote goes out. JIT feedback.
- Lee
|
By
Lee Calcote
·
#3075
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 (non-binding)
By
Ken Owens
·
#3074
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
A question out of curiosity here. Shouldn't the movement of projects across various stages in CNCF be based on how many of the end user community and customers have adopted and how the product is
A question out of curiosity here. Shouldn't the movement of projects across various stages in CNCF be based on how many of the end user community and customers have adopted and how the product is
|
By
Rakshith Venkatesh
·
#3073
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 non binding
--
Christian Posta
twitter: @christianposta
http://blog.christianposta.com
+1 non binding
--
Christian Posta
twitter: @christianposta
http://blog.christianposta.com
|
By
Christian Posta
·
#3072
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
+1 (non-binding).
By
Ihor Dvoretskyi
·
#3071
·
|
|
[VOTE] OPA moving to incubation
OPA has requested to move to the incubation maturity level:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/199
Since entering the CNCF Sandbox, OPA has demonstrated growth and progress. 12 releases were published
OPA has requested to move to the incubation maturity level:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/199
Since entering the CNCF Sandbox, OPA has demonstrated growth and progress. 12 releases were published
|
By
Chris Aniszczyk
·
#3070
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] CNCF SIGs Proposal
+ 1
By
Sandeep Shilawat
·
#3069
·
|
|
Re: [VOTE] CNCF SIGs Proposal
+1 binding
By
Li, Xiang
·
#3068
·
|
|
Fluentd Graduation Request (2017-2019)
Hello TOC!,
My name is Eduardo Silva from Fluentd project.
On November 2016, sponsored by Brian Grant, Fluentd joined CNCF in the Incubating stage. One year later in November 2017, we submitted PR
Hello TOC!,
My name is Eduardo Silva from Fluentd project.
On November 2016, sponsored by Brian Grant, Fluentd joined CNCF in the Incubating stage. One year later in November 2017, we submitted PR
|
By
Eduardo Silva
·
#3067
·
|
|
Re: thought leadership
The CNCF is being looked to as a thought leader, and as I read the mission statement it seems to clearly evoke a strong leadership role “fostering and sustaining an ecosystem.” I like Liz’s
The CNCF is being looked to as a thought leader, and as I read the mission statement it seems to clearly evoke a strong leadership role “fostering and sustaining an ecosystem.” I like Liz’s
|
By
Sarah Allen
·
#3066
·
|
|
Re: CVE Filing for OSS Projects Shut down (DWF)
GitHub is fine. I think someone approved my moderated message to this list quite some time after I sent it. I sent this message before filling on GitHub, and I filed on GitHub because I realized I
GitHub is fine. I think someone approved my moderated message to this list quite some time after I sent it. I sent this message before filling on GitHub, and I filed on GitHub because I realized I
|
By
Brandon Philips <bphilips@...>
·
#3065
·
|
|
Re: thought leadership
Yup. I kind of like what we did in the Serverless WG. We produced a whitepaper and landscape doc to help people understand what serverless is all about, what's going on in the community, what's out
Yup. I kind of like what we did in the Serverless WG. We produced a whitepaper and landscape doc to help people understand what serverless is all about, what's going on in the community, what's out
|
By
Doug Davis <dug@...>
·
#3064
·
|
|
Re: thought leadership
+100 to what Liz said.
I think that the Storage and Serverless working groups have created very useful "landscape white papers" (see below) to clarify common terminology, ways to evaluate alternative
+100 to what Liz said.
I think that the Storage and Serverless working groups have created very useful "landscape white papers" (see below) to clarify common terminology, ways to evaluate alternative
|
By
Quinton Hoole
·
#3063
·
|
|
Re: thought leadership
When I was writing the SIG Responsibilities I added a bullet under the end user education section that reads:
I don’t know if I would call this “thought leadership” in the typical sense. The
When I was writing the SIG Responsibilities I added a bullet under the end user education section that reads:
I don’t know if I would call this “thought leadership” in the typical sense. The
|
By
Matt Farina
·
#3062
·
|