Re: [VOTE] Rook Graduation
Dear all,
+1, NB
Thank you,
Tina ^ ^
On Aug 15, 2020, at 1:31 AM, Liz Rice via lists.cncf.io <liz=lizrice.com@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: [VOTE] Rook Graduation
Liz Rice
|
||
|
||
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Cortex for Incubation
Michelle Noorali <michelle.noorali@...>
+1 binding
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 12:24 PM Liz Rice <liz@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: [VOTE] k3s for Sandbox
Katie Gamanji
+1 binding I would like to bring the end-user perspective to the discussion. At this stage, there are different requirements to operate a k8s cluster and some teams and companies are using k3s (due to its opinionated structure) as a solid exploration point. It benefits the community as a project and I CNCF will be a great home to further the growth of this project. Katie Gamanji
|
||
|
||
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Cortex for Incubation
Liz Rice
+1 binding
|
||
|
||
Re: [VOTE] Thanos for Incubation
Michelle Noorali <michelle.noorali@...>
+1 binding
|
||
|
||
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention
Brendan Burns
In general, CNCF hasn't paid for infrastructure, so I think if we were going to do something like that, we should talk about it generally.
However, in this case, as was noted, I think the effect is minimal to non-existent, since by definition any image that hasn't been pulled in 6 months is pretty low-impact.
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Frederick Kautz via lists.cncf.io <frederick=kautz.dev@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 10:01 AM To: saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...> Cc: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>; Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention Adding to this, sccording to the faq, inactive images are defined as images that have not been pulled or pushed in at least 6 months.
This could still break things, but shouldn't be too disruptive for active projects. However, old images which should probably be retained/archived could disappear. On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, 9:28 AM saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Tech Lead nomination for SIG Observability: Bartłomiej Płotka
Nayak, Mahesh Manjunath (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
+1, binding.
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...>
On Behalf Of Brendan Burns via lists.cncf.io
+1, binding.
From:
cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Michelle Noorali via lists.cncf.io <michelle.noorali=gmail.com@...>
+1 binding
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 1:13 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Cortex for Incubation
Brendan Burns
+1, binding.
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Bartłomiej Płotka via lists.cncf.io <bwplotka=gmail.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 8:26 AM To: sheng@... <sheng@...> Cc: x.li@... <x.li@...>; cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...>; Vineeth Reddy <vineethbfhs@...>; Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Cortex for Incubation +1 NB 💪
Kind Regards,
Bartek
|
||
|
||
Re: CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention
Adding to this, sccording to the faq, inactive images are defined as images that have not been pulled or pushed in at least 6 months. This could still break things, but shouldn't be too disruptive for active projects. However, old images which should probably be retained/archived could disappear.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, 9:28 AM saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Tech Lead nomination for SIG Observability: Bartłomiej Płotka
Brendan Burns
+1, binding.
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Michelle Noorali via lists.cncf.io <michelle.noorali=gmail.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 8:20 AM To: Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> Cc: Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Tech Lead nomination for SIG Observability: Bartłomiej Płotka
|
||
|
||
Re: [VOTE] Thanos for Incubation
Sheng Liang <sheng@...>
+1 binding
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of "Justin Cormack via lists.cncf.io" <justin.cormack=docker.com@...>
+1 (binding)
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 7:00 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention
saiyam pathak
I think the FAQ states that only the inactive images will be scheduled for deletion. What will happen to inactive images once the expiration date is reached?Beginning November 1, 2020, any images that are marked as “inactive” will be scheduled for deletion. Account owners will also be notified by email of “inactive” images that are scheduled for deletion.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:53 PM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention
This is more of a question for CNCF Staff than the TOC :) I moved the issue here: https://github.com/cncf/foundation/issues/106 I haven't fully read the policy yet to understand the impact but we are happy to offer options, some projects have paid plans already.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 11:19 AM Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...> wrote: Starting Nov 1, 2020, Docker is planning to limit retention of images on Docker Hub for free accounts to 6m [1]. This will likely affect many CNCF projects that distribute binaries. For example, while the Jaeger projects makes multiple releases per year, it does not mean that all users are upgrading more frequently than 6m. We also have a number of build and CI related images that are not updated that often, and if they start TTL-ing out it will introduce additional maintenance burden. --
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
|
||
|
||
CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention
Starting Nov 1, 2020, Docker is planning to limit retention of images on Docker Hub for free accounts to 6m [1]. This will likely affect many CNCF projects that distribute binaries. For example, while the Jaeger projects makes multiple releases per year, it does not mean that all users are upgrading more frequently than 6m. We also have a number of build and CI related images that are not updated that often, and if they start TTL-ing out it will introduce additional maintenance burden.
What is the TOC recommendation on this front? Should CNCF upgrade some of Docker Hub accounts (e.g. starting with graduated projects) to paid plans? [1]: https://www.docker.com/pricing/retentionfaq
|
||
|
||
Re: k3s sandbox proposal
craig@...
Hi everyone,
Per the TOC's recommendation, the K3s team has updated our README.md to include a roadmap and some other information that hopefully helps clarify what K3s is and isn't. We appreciate the TOC's guidance and the community's feedback in the voting thread to help us improve in these areas. We look forward to continuing in this direction! https://github.com/rancher/k3s Regards, Craig J
|
||
|
||
Re: [VOTE] Rook Graduation
Saad Ali
+1 Binding
|
||
|
||
Re: [VOTE] TiKV Graduation
Saad Ali
The TOC discussed the concerns around the PD dependency this morning. Given Liu's indication that the library could be migrated to the TiKV project, let's go ahead and do that. Liu, can you please update https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/414 with the migration status. We can kick off voting again once that is done.
|
||
|
||
Re: [VOTE] Tech Lead nomination for SIG Observability: Bartłomiej Płotka
Michelle Noorali <michelle.noorali@...>
+1 binding
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 1:13 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
|
||
|
||
Re: [VOTE] TiKV Graduation
Liu Tang
Thanks TOC for raising this concern. I am Tang Liu, and I am speaking here both as a TiKV maintainer and a member of the broader eco-system & community. It’s true that Placement Driver is an indispensable part for TiKV, as the meta store and central scheduling center. The original rationale behind the current placement of PD (under PingCAP with TiDB, the distributed SQL database) is to take PD as a significant dependency library in the TiDB eco-system (TiKV included) and other TiKV-alike stores as well. Besides TiKV, there are multiple major TiDB features or components that depend on PD. For example, Dashboard (https://docs.pingcap.com/tidb/dev/dashboard-intro), our visual diagnosis platform, depends on PD to obtain necessary data. Unistore (https://github.com/ngaut/unistore), a KV store in GO to quickly validate TiDB optimizations depends on PD to deploy and run. Some scenario based features like multi-data center are made possible by PD. Outside of TiDB, there are other projects building distributed KV stores based on PD. With a vibrant TiDB ecosystem of almost 1000 adopters and other PD based projects, we believe PD has been in a health and sustained maintenance and has formed its own eco-system over time. However, if this could not clear the concern of TOC, we are willing to migrate the entire PD library to the TiKV project. Liu Tang Frederick Kautz <frederick@...> 于2020年8月11日周二 上午4:51写道:
|
||
|