|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
"Alex Zhu
+1 nb
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Anjana Fernando
+1 non-binding.
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 7:57 PM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Sandbox projects and timing requirements
Michael Ducy
I don't think it's a loophole. It appears to be by design. The Sandbox guidelines (https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/sandbox.md) clearly state that one of the goals of Sandbox is to: "Encourage public visibility of experiments or other early work that can add value to the CNCF mission and build the ingredients of a successful Incubation level project." Additionally the guidelines state that the Sandbox is for early stage projects, defining early stage as: "Any project that realistically intends to join CNCF Incubation in future and wishes to lay the foundations for that" Projects entering Sandbox might have different gaps they need to fill before they can move to Incubation. Some might have more gaps, some less, and thus projects will exit at different speeds. Michael
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 8:18 PM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Sandbox projects and timing requirements
Lee Calcote
Yes, that’s how I read Eduardo’s question as well - one of ensuring a loophole doesn’t exist.
- Lee
Sent from my mobile
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Brian Grant via Lists.Cncf.Io <briangrant=google.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 6:44:43 PM To: Quinton Hoole Cc: cncf-toc@... Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] Sandbox projects and timing requirements On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 3:59 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton.hoole@...> wrote:
I think Eduardo's point is that it looks like getting to incubation through sandbox is easier than just entering directly via incubation.
I don't think that should be the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Sandbox projects and timing requirements
Brian Grant
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 3:59 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton.hoole@...> wrote:
I think Eduardo's point is that it looks like getting to incubation through sandbox is easier than just entering directly via incubation. I don't think that should be the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Haining Zhang
(in reponse to Justin's comment) Though Harbor may not be the only solution to a private registry,
thousands of users choose Harbor to manage container images in
their production environments. The user base includes many large
internet companies and enterprises in the world. In some
environments, Harbor manages tens of thousands of images and
supports thousands of container hosts. Typical use cases of Harbor
include RBAC on images, image replication across geographically
distributed locations, vulnerability scanning etc. Haining
On 11/7/18 3:21 AM, Justin Garrison
wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Sandbox projects and timing requirements
Quinton Hoole
To add to what Chris said, and responding directly to:
"since it would be easier to go with sandbox and then jump into incubation, than do direct to incubation (which is harder). “
The above is not the intention at all. Is there any reason you believe that getting to incubation via sandbox is more difficult? If so, we might need to clarify our communication around that.
Q
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>
Date: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 at 15:10 To: Eduardo Silva <eduardo@...> Cc: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] Sandbox projects and timing requirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Sandbox projects and timing requirements
We decided not to put any timelines on anything in the beginning as each project is going to be different at its maturity stage. There are projects that may have decent adoption but low maintainer diversity and so on. The maturity levels are outlined pretty well here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/graduation_criteria.adoc The particular line "since these metrics can vary significantly depending on the type, scope and size of a project, the TOC has final judgement over the level of activity that is adequate to meet these criteria" was put in place to give the TOC some flexibility in decisions making as they are the final arbiter of maturity level decisions. IMHO I don't think having a minimum time to bake is a bad idea but that is going to be different for each project as some are quicker to mature than others. You're welcome to propose improvements to the sandbox process and discuss it in a PR: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/sandbox.md
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 4:25 PM Eduardo Silva <eduardo@...> wrote:
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sandbox projects and timing requirements
Eduardo Silva
Hi, Why Sandbox projects don't have a minimum time of requirement before to try to move to incubation ? I see that Harbor joined as a Sandbox project on July 31 and just after 3 months moving forward to incubation ? To be clear, this is not something against Harbor, but I see a potential "gray area" since it would be easier to go with sandbox and then jump into incubation, than do direct to incubation (which is harder). comments ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Igor Mameshin
+1 non-binding
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 6:27 AM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Ruben Orduz <ruben@...>
+1 agree to what Justin said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Baldwin, Matt
+1 nb
-matt
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Justin Garrison <justinleegarrison@...>
Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 11:21:01 AM To: Lee Calcote Cc: Chris Aniszczyk; Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
-1 nb
I understand the need for container registries in a containerized environment, but I'm not sold Harbor being the solution for most people's needs when they need to run their own registry.
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 8:56 AM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Justin Garrison <justinleegarrison@...>
-1 nb I understand the need for container registries in a containerized environment, but I'm not sold Harbor being the solution for most people's needs when they need to run their own registry.
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 8:56 AM Lee Calcote <leecalcote@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Lee Calcote
+1 non-binding
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
+1 non-binding
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018, 8:26 AM Haining Zhang <hi@...> wrote: +1 non-binding --
Shea Stewart, Partner
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Haining Zhang
+1 non-binding
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
alan.fraser@...
+1 non-binding.
From: cncf-toc@... [mailto:cncf-toc@...]
On Behalf Of Chris Aniszczyk
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2018 2:27 PM To: CNCF TOC Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
The Harbor community has requested to move to the incubation maturity level and believes it has fulfilled the criteria: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/163
Document that it is being used successfully in production by at least three independent end users which, in the TOC’s judgement, are of adequate quality and scope:
https://github.com/goharbor/harbor/blob/master/ADOPTERS.md
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719 NOTICE: Morgan Stanley is not acting as a municipal advisor and the opinions or views contained herein are not intended to be, and do not constitute, advice within the meaning of Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. If you have received this communication in error, please destroy all electronic and paper copies and notify the sender immediately. Mistransmission is not intended to waive confidentiality or privilege. Morgan Stanley reserves the right, to the extent required and/or permitted under applicable law, to monitor electronic communications, including telephone calls with Morgan Stanley personnel. This message is subject to the Morgan Stanley General Disclaimers available at the following link: http://www.morganstanley.com/disclaimers. If you cannot access the links, please notify us by reply message and we will send the contents to you. By communicating with Morgan Stanley you acknowledge that you have read, understand and consent, (where applicable), to the foregoing and the Morgan Stanley General Disclaimers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Liz Rice
+1 non binding
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
Quinton Hoole
+1 binding
From:Chris Aniszczyk
To:CNCF TOC,
Date:2018-11-06 06:27:26
Subject:[cncf-toc] [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
The Harbor community has requested to move to the incubation maturity level and believes it has fulfilled the criteria: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/163
They have also created a presentation on top of the proposal for the community: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1aBQnE96kKatc1_t3E97lJBwiWvL-3GTitojuv-nWMuo/edit?usp=sharing Maintainers of the project are listed in https://github.com/goharbor/harbor/blob/master/OWNERS.md Maintainers are added and removed from the project as per the policies outlined in the project governance: https://github.com/goharbor/community/blob/master/GOVERNANCE.md Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions: Releases: 7 major releases - https://github.com/goharbor/harbor/releases Roadmap: https://github.com/goharbor/harbor/wiki/Harbor-Roadmap Contributors: https://github.com/goharbor/harbor/graphs/contributors Commit activity: https://github.com/goharbor/harbor/graphs/commit-activity CNCF DevStats: https://harbor.devstats.cncf.io Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread; the full proposal located here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/163 Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support! -- Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Harbor moving to incubation
sonya@...
+1 binding
--
Thanks, Sonya - Sonya Koptyev | Director of Evangelism | m: +1 425 505 0100 
|
|
|
|
