The TOC has decided to invite rook (https://github.com/rook/rook) as an INCEPTION level CNCF project, sponsored by Ben Hindman from the TOC. Rook is an open source orchestrator for distributed storage

At the TOC meeting earlier this week, the TOC has decided to invite 4 projects for voting after a lengthy community due diligence period: rook: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/57 vitess:

+1 non-binding for me, with +1 to Brian Grant on process

+1 from me, as well, but we need to talk about the desired process going forward

Apologies, my vote is binding.

+1 non-binding.

Here is my +1 Vote

Contributor diversity is not an explicit criterion at the incubation stage: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/graduation_criteria.adoc

+1 to keeping it - non-binding thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Architecture & Technology (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 |

I think the biggest concern is that Buoyant continues to dominate development given that other companies are generally making small patches rather than becoming major contributors.

I don't have a binding vote either but I am curious given linkerd's impressive stats why it isn't being promoted? Best Duncan -- Duncan Johnston-Watt Founder & Chair, Advisory Board Phone: +44

I don't have a vote, but I'd love to see linkerd remain a CNCF project. - brandon

FWIW that article is not 100% correct. Linkerd ships with a control plane (Namerd). This is how these companies are controlling routing policy across Linkerd instances. -William

Yes, this is simply "let's keep this project going" decision. It's in two steps because I'd like to queue up multiple projects to be reviewed to graduate/move to the next level in one TOC call. I'd

"Why are we doing this in 2 steps? This is just a "yes, we want to keep the project" decision?" agreed, Chris, what's your thinking here? <briangrant=google.com@...> wrote:

In general, I'd like to link to devstats dashboards in these types of reviews, so we can see the trajectory. For

Different projects make different design tradeoffs. Also, these 2 projects aren't directly comparable. This article explains the difference pretty

CNCF allows for competing projects, see our TOC principles for more information on this: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/PRINCIPLES.md#no-kingmakers--one-size-does-not-fit-all Istio currently

Hi Chris, Personally, I would like to get clarification of competing component: linkerd vs istio. I learnt for example one company I met in KubeCon converting from linkerd to

Hey TOC and community, we are requesting a vote to keep linkerd (https://github.com/linkerd/linkerd) as an inception project for another year based on their presentation yesterday. Here are some stats