Date   

special agenda for next week's TOC call?

alexis richardson
 

all,

I have a commitment during next week's TOC call, so Chris A will chair

we were thinking that it MIGHT be useful to have a special session "meet the marketing and PR teams"

thoughts?

a


Re: an interesting read, about "Cloud Native"

Lee Calcote
 

I agree that the mission section contains mechanics. It does contain a mission statement. Perhaps, mechanics are best separated. A separate “Cloud Native Qualities” section could include not only these mechanics, but softer properties of values held dear by the foundation (e.g. immutable infra, automatic discovery, self-healing, etc.). 

While I don’t disagree with Brian’s point that VMs are currently not explicitly included, they are not implicitly excluded either. With the vast amount of work, energy, effort it takes the foundation to track and steward the container ecosystem, I question whether this group (the foundation) will be successful if it tries to explicitly include consideration for VMs within the scope charter as well. Albeit not focused on microservices architectures, other foundations (even within the Linux Foundation like the OVA) are saddled with VM-specific charters. Understanding many organizations will run CNCF container projects within or pointed at VMs, is the lack of explicit inclusion ok or do people feel like there needs to be a specific statement here? 

With respect to the list of developer responsibilities, I’ll tack-on security as another responsibility.

- Lee

On May 4, 2016, at 1:36 AM, Brian Grant via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hi all,

Not too long ago Joe Beda wrote an interesting doc about "Cloud Native".  I have his permission to share it, and so I am posting a URL below. 

I bring this to your attention because it may help us think about how to define "cloud native" for prospective projects and end users.   Obviously this is Joe's take on things.  What do others think?


alexis

Our mission is currently defined more natively than Joe's definition of "cloud native":

The mission is described in terms of mechanisms rather than goals: containers, dynamic management, micro-services.

To me, "cloud native" implies turn-key/self-service/automated provisioning, predictable/reproducible deployment, elastic scaling, self-healing, automatic discovery, and automatic monitoring. These properties increase the velocity of application delivery and management scalability (i.e., manage N things as easily as 1).

ssh-ing into an instance to configure it manually in a non-reproducible fashion, manually creating a configuration file listing IP addresses of specific instances, and crashing if a dependency is not reachable are examples that don't quality as "cloud native".

Are containers more "cloud native" than VMs? Unless we want to change our mission/charter, this question doesn't really matter, but containers do facilitate higher-level and more automated management and introspection. VMs are by nature more opaque and responsible for more of the application lifecycle. However, we may consider a number of projects (e.g., Prometheus) that could be used equally well with either containers or VMs.

On DevOps: Joe mentions that developers are incentivized to make their applications production-ready, but one thing that's not made clear enough is that developers are responsible for meeting operational requirements: reliability, availability, scalability, efficiency, liveness and readiness signals, exported metrics, actionable logging, termination/signal handling, self-configuration based on the environment, configuration knobs exposed to operators, compatibility with the production environment, ... Failure to meet these requirements is a bug. Operators are both partners and customers.


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc


Re: Doodle Poll: TOC F2F Meeting- June

Chris Aniszczyk
 

"iv. Transparency. TOC meetings, mailing list, minutes, etc should be open."

we could invite a limited number of folks depending on the space, we should definitely publish any minutes from this meeting

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Alexis Richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
Chris

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 3:52 PM Sarah Novotny via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
would this be a public or closed door meeting?

Can you let us know what the Charter requires in this regard please?

a



 



On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC Members,

As discussed on the call today, there was consensus to do an informal F2F meeting of the TOC in the DockerCon June timeframe in Seattle. Solomon has graciously volunteered to help out on the logistics front to host the meeting. 

Please take this Doodle Poll to determine a timeslot that works for the group. All times are in PT and I'll close the poll next Tuesday May 17th before the next TOC call. 

Best,
Sarah



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


Re: Doodle Poll: TOC F2F Meeting- June

alexis richardson
 

Chris

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 3:52 PM Sarah Novotny via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
would this be a public or closed door meeting?

Can you let us know what the Charter requires in this regard please?

a



 



On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC Members,

As discussed on the call today, there was consensus to do an informal F2F meeting of the TOC in the DockerCon June timeframe in Seattle. Solomon has graciously volunteered to help out on the logistics front to host the meeting. 

Please take this Doodle Poll to determine a timeslot that works for the group. All times are in PT and I'll close the poll next Tuesday May 17th before the next TOC call. 

Best,
Sarah



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc


Re: Doodle Poll: TOC F2F Meeting- June

Sarah Novotny <sarahnovotny@...>
 

would this be a public or closed door meeting?



On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC Members,

As discussed on the call today, there was consensus to do an informal F2F meeting of the TOC in the DockerCon June timeframe in Seattle. Solomon has graciously volunteered to help out on the logistics front to host the meeting. 

Please take this Doodle Poll to determine a timeslot that works for the group. All times are in PT and I'll close the poll next Tuesday May 17th before the next TOC call. 

Best,
Sarah



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Re: Mozilla Open Source Support (MOSS): Now Open To All Projects | The Mozilla Blog

alexis richardson
 

That's right.  One day, companies who sponsor CNCF might see fit to publish "RFPs" and "RFQs" for extension points of OSS in CNCF.  These could operate on a bounty-type system.  

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:52 PM, Brian Grant <briangrant@...> wrote:

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:

Just sayin 



_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc




Doodle Poll: TOC F2F Meeting- June

Sarah Saul <ssaul@...>
 

Hello TOC Members,

As discussed on the call today, there was consensus to do an informal F2F meeting of the TOC in the DockerCon June timeframe in Seattle. Solomon has graciously volunteered to help out on the logistics front to host the meeting. 

Please take this Doodle Poll to determine a timeslot that works for the group. All times are in PT and I'll close the poll next Tuesday May 17th before the next TOC call. 

Best,
Sarah



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul


Re: Mozilla Open Source Support (MOSS): Now Open To All Projects | The Mozilla Blog

Brian Grant
 

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:

Just sayin 



_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Mozilla Open Source Support (MOSS): Now Open To All Projects | The Mozilla Blog

alexis richardson
 


apache foundation security

Camille Fournier
 

http://www.apache.org/security/

An example model for having foundation support for vulnerability management and mitigation


Re: Slides for TOC Call: 5/11/16

alexis richardson
 

In particular, note that I linked to some slides on the "how CNCF adds value to projects" topic




On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Here are the slides/agenda for today's call. 


TOC Call- 5/11/16
8AM PT
Optional dial in number: 646-494-8704
No PIN needed

Speak with you all in about 20 minutes.

Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Slides for TOC Call: 5/11/16

Sarah Saul <ssaul@...>
 

Here are the slides/agenda for today's call. 

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1olmQk5Xvp9xlLbVjNA3QP1mZU4p4yj_FAfUTFgr-9cA/edit?ts=572a21b3#slide=id.gd5ae4e962_2_136 

TOC Call- 5/11/16
8AM PT
Optional dial in number: 646-494-8704
No PIN needed

Speak with you all in about 20 minutes.

Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul


subscribe

Sengor Kusturica <sengork@...>
 


Call tomorrow

Bryan Cantrill <bryan@...>
 


I have a 7:30 presentation tomorrow morning (!) and can't make the call tomorrow, with my apologies!

        - Bryan


Re: VOTE "incubation principle"

Elissa Murphy <elissam@...>
 

+1

Thx,
e

From: Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...>
Reply-To: Alexis Richardson <alexis@...>
Date: Monday, May 9, 2016 at 1:02 PM
To: Sarah Saul <ssaul@...>
Cc: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] VOTE "incubation principle"

oh well in that case:

YES

now we are six.


On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Sarah Saul <ssaul@...> wrote:
Just recapping the current vote for record keeping purposes.

Binding TOC votes:

Non-binding community votes:



On Mon, May 9, 2016 12:55 PM, Alexis Richardson alexis@... wrote:
Sarah

Please could you summarise the votes to date.

a

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC members,

Friendly reminder to vote on the “incubation principle” if you haven't already done so. We have 5 out of the 9 TOC votes.

+1 (non binding)

Best,
Sarah


On Fri, May 6, 2016 11:08 AM, Brian Grant via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote:
YES

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:


TOC voters,

Per our call this week, we wish to record support for the “incubation principle” via a vote on a formal statement.

Please indicate your vote on when a project is promoted from Incubation by saying YES or NO. Today we are seeking unanimous support, from all TOC voting members, for the following statement. If this vote is passed then we shall record the principle in appropriate venues such as the CNCF development process (which is still being worked out). 

alexis

----
“1. The time when becoming a CNCF Project is irrevocable is when a project is promoted from Incubation

2. Prior to this a project may choose to leave, or be asked to leave.

The TOC might change this rule in the future but for now it has a clear rationale: it enables new projects to have a safety valve. Before the TOC has finalised its modus operandi and how we help CNCF projects, we want projects to join CNCF and help us shape our model. So we are asking projects to join despite this uncertainty. In return we provide a safety valve.”
----

FYI: Stemmed from the April 13th discussion: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-April/000131.html


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul


Re: VOTE "incubation principle"

alexis richardson
 

Matt,

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Matt T. Proud ⚔ <matt.proud@...> wrote:
This is sensible as a safety mechanism.  I appreciate the consideration.

Thanks.

 

Apologies if it has been defined elsewhere, but has a standard period/duration been prescribed for the incubation period, or is the promotion to be proposed on an ad hoc basis?  Also: what is the notice period between proposal of promotion and its effectuation, if at all?

We are still working on these things.

FWIW, I don't think it will be possible to presuppose a single duration.  I would hope we can avoid the antipattern where a project get stuck in perpetual incubation.  




On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 10:02 PM Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
oh well in that case:

YES

now we are six.


On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Sarah Saul <ssaul@...> wrote:
Just recapping the current vote for record keeping purposes.

Binding TOC votes:

Non-binding community votes:



On Mon, May 9, 2016 12:55 PM, Alexis Richardson alexis@... wrote:
Sarah

Please could you summarise the votes to date.

a

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC members,

Friendly reminder to vote on the “incubation principle” if you haven't already done so. We have 5 out of the 9 TOC votes.

+1 (non binding)

Best,
Sarah


On Fri, May 6, 2016 11:08 AM, Brian Grant via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote:
YES

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:


TOC voters,

Per our call this week, we wish to record support for the “incubation principle” via a vote on a formal statement.

Please indicate your vote on when a project is promoted from Incubation by saying YES or NO. Today we are seeking unanimous support, from all TOC voting members, for the following statement. If this vote is passed then we shall record the principle in appropriate venues such as the CNCF development process (which is still being worked out). 

alexis

----
“1. The time when becoming a CNCF Project is irrevocable is when a project is promoted from Incubation

2. Prior to this a project may choose to leave, or be asked to leave.

The TOC might change this rule in the future but for now it has a clear rationale: it enables new projects to have a safety valve. Before the TOC has finalised its modus operandi and how we help CNCF projects, we want projects to join CNCF and help us shape our model. So we are asking projects to join despite this uncertainty. In return we provide a safety valve.”
----

FYI: Stemmed from the April 13th discussion: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-April/000131.html


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc


Re: VOTE "incubation principle"

Matt T. Proud
 

This is sensible as a safety mechanism.  I appreciate the consideration.

Apologies if it has been defined elsewhere, but has a standard period/duration been prescribed for the incubation period, or is the promotion to be proposed on an ad hoc basis?  Also: what is the notice period between proposal of promotion and its effectuation, if at all?

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 10:02 PM Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
oh well in that case:

YES

now we are six.


On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Sarah Saul <ssaul@...> wrote:
Just recapping the current vote for record keeping purposes.

Binding TOC votes:

Non-binding community votes:



On Mon, May 9, 2016 12:55 PM, Alexis Richardson alexis@... wrote:
Sarah

Please could you summarise the votes to date.

a

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC members,

Friendly reminder to vote on the “incubation principle” if you haven't already done so. We have 5 out of the 9 TOC votes.

+1 (non binding)

Best,
Sarah


On Fri, May 6, 2016 11:08 AM, Brian Grant via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote:
YES

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:


TOC voters,

Per our call this week, we wish to record support for the “incubation principle” via a vote on a formal statement.

Please indicate your vote on when a project is promoted from Incubation by saying YES or NO. Today we are seeking unanimous support, from all TOC voting members, for the following statement. If this vote is passed then we shall record the principle in appropriate venues such as the CNCF development process (which is still being worked out). 

alexis

----
“1. The time when becoming a CNCF Project is irrevocable is when a project is promoted from Incubation

2. Prior to this a project may choose to leave, or be asked to leave.

The TOC might change this rule in the future but for now it has a clear rationale: it enables new projects to have a safety valve. Before the TOC has finalised its modus operandi and how we help CNCF projects, we want projects to join CNCF and help us shape our model. So we are asking projects to join despite this uncertainty. In return we provide a safety valve.”
----

FYI: Stemmed from the April 13th discussion: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-April/000131.html


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc


Re: VOTE "incubation principle"

alexis richardson
 

oh well in that case:

YES

now we are six.


On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Sarah Saul <ssaul@...> wrote:
Just recapping the current vote for record keeping purposes.

Binding TOC votes:

Non-binding community votes:



On Mon, May 9, 2016 12:55 PM, Alexis Richardson alexis@... wrote:
Sarah

Please could you summarise the votes to date.

a

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC members,

Friendly reminder to vote on the “incubation principle” if you haven't already done so. We have 5 out of the 9 TOC votes.

+1 (non binding)

Best,
Sarah


On Fri, May 6, 2016 11:08 AM, Brian Grant via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote:
YES

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:


TOC voters,

Per our call this week, we wish to record support for the “incubation principle” via a vote on a formal statement.

Please indicate your vote on when a project is promoted from Incubation by saying YES or NO. Today we are seeking unanimous support, from all TOC voting members, for the following statement. If this vote is passed then we shall record the principle in appropriate venues such as the CNCF development process (which is still being worked out). 

alexis

----
“1. The time when becoming a CNCF Project is irrevocable is when a project is promoted from Incubation

2. Prior to this a project may choose to leave, or be asked to leave.

The TOC might change this rule in the future but for now it has a clear rationale: it enables new projects to have a safety valve. Before the TOC has finalised its modus operandi and how we help CNCF projects, we want projects to join CNCF and help us shape our model. So we are asking projects to join despite this uncertainty. In return we provide a safety valve.”
----

FYI: Stemmed from the April 13th discussion: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-April/000131.html


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul


Re: VOTE "incubation principle"

Sarah Saul <ssaul@...>
 

Just recapping the current vote for record keeping purposes.

Binding TOC votes:
+1 Ben Hindman: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-May/000196.html
+1 Ken Owens: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-May/000197.html
+1 Jonathan Boulle: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-May/000199.html
+1 Camille Fournier: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-May/000200.html
+1 Brian Grant: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-May/000201.html

Non-binding community votes:
+1 Sarah Saul: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-May/000202.html



On Mon, May 9, 2016 12:55 PM, Alexis Richardson alexis@... wrote:
Sarah

Please could you summarise the votes to date.

a

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC members,

Friendly reminder to vote on the “incubation principle” if you haven't already done so. We have 5 out of the 9 TOC votes.

+1 (non binding)

Best,
Sarah


On Fri, May 6, 2016 11:08 AM, Brian Grant via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote:
YES

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:


TOC voters,

Per our call this week, we wish to record support for the “incubation principle” via a vote on a formal statement.

Please indicate your vote on when a project is promoted from Incubation by saying YES or NO. Today we are seeking unanimous support, from all TOC voting members, for the following statement. If this vote is passed then we shall record the principle in appropriate venues such as the CNCF development process (which is still being worked out). 

alexis

----
“1. The time when becoming a CNCF Project is irrevocable is when a project is promoted from Incubation

2. Prior to this a project may choose to leave, or be asked to leave.

The TOC might change this rule in the future but for now it has a clear rationale: it enables new projects to have a safety valve. Before the TOC has finalised its modus operandi and how we help CNCF projects, we want projects to join CNCF and help us shape our model. So we are asking projects to join despite this uncertainty. In return we provide a safety valve.”
----

FYI: Stemmed from the April 13th discussion: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-April/000131.html


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul


Re: VOTE "incubation principle"

alexis richardson
 

Sarah

Please could you summarise the votes to date.

a

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Sarah Saul via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
Hello TOC members,

Friendly reminder to vote on the “incubation principle” if you haven't already done so. We have 5 out of the 9 TOC votes.

+1 (non binding)

Best,
Sarah


On Fri, May 6, 2016 11:08 AM, Brian Grant via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote:
YES

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:


TOC voters,

Per our call this week, we wish to record support for the "incubation principle" via a vote on a formal statement.

Please indicate your vote on when a project is promoted from Incubation by saying YES or NO. Today we are seeking unanimous support, from all TOC voting members, for the following statement. If this vote is passed then we shall record the principle in appropriate venues such as the CNCF development process (which is still being worked out). 

alexis

----
“1. The time when becoming a CNCF Project is irrevocable is when a project is promoted from Incubation

2. Prior to this a project may choose to leave, or be asked to leave.

The TOC might change this rule in the future but for now it has a clear rationale: it enables new projects to have a safety valve. Before the TOC has finalised its modus operandi and how we help CNCF projects, we want projects to join CNCF and help us shape our model. So we are asking projects to join despite this uncertainty. In return we provide a safety valve.”
----

FYI: Stemmed from the April 13th discussion: http://lists.cncf.io/pipermail/cncf-toc/2016-April/000131.html


_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc



Sarah Saul
Client Services Manager
The Linux Foundation
(M) 520-245-5185
Skype: srsaul

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc


6161 - 6180 of 6383