On 6/17/22 07:53, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> So let's please go ahead and file a PR and we can do what we usually do
> to start a WG.
>

I think we need to wait until Tuesday.  Then a PR will be coming.

--
-- Josh Berkus
    Kubernetes Community Architect
    OSPO, OCTO

TOC:

TAG Contributor Strategy would like to create the Mentoring Working
Group, under our TAG.

You can find, and comment on, a draft charter here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B_hpVAKxxNaSgVYAsHdjq_57eZEkYUuxcxecbcl3H9c/edit?usp=sharing

The Mentoring WG is a home for organized mentoring activity that was
already happening in the CNCF.  It was originally requested by Ihor
before he became unavailable, and will be led by CNCF staff and
contractors; particularly Nate Waddington (CNCF) and Jay Tihema (ii) to
start. They hope to recruit additional WG contributors from our
community, of course, and a few have tentatively stepped up per the charter.

Right now Mentoring is a Team inside TAG-CS, and we've already begun
work on several initiatives, including LFX, GSOC, GSOD, Outreachy, and a
new effort to make students in NZ aware of internship opportunities in
the CNCF.

The latter will include creation of an indigenous pilot programme to
launch among regional education providers; and career and resource
development in collaboration with stakeholders in community, education,
industry and local government.

We expect learning gained from this approach will help to identify and
bridge suitable candidates into the various mentoring opportunities
available, and act as a framework that can be applied to other groups
globally.

--
-- Josh Berkus, TAG-CS Chair
    Dawn Foster, TAG-CS Chair
    Jay Tihema, Mentoring Team Lead
    Nate Waddington, Mentoring Team Lead

On 6/16/22 17:43, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> instead of the recording or in addition to the zoom recording?

In addition.

--
-- Josh Berkus
    Kubernetes Community Architect
    OSPO, OCTO

On 6/14/22 17:20, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Please review the recording https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I
> <https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I> you will hear us talk about the section
> in the main README that says to contact you directly via email. it may
> be good to point to the contributing markdown file instead etc. i've
> added you in the #toc channel for follow up.
>

Can I suggest again that this kind of feedback get created as an issue
in the TOC repo, so that everyone can track it better?

--
-- Josh Berkus
    Kubernetes Community Architect
    OSPO, OCTO

Kyverno has applied to move to the incubation level.

PR: PR: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/784

Due Diligence doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18dWgOd2MUQz3RXI1R9vKntL3ULyZhOD1HEtijGOeaWg/edit?usp=sharing

Davanum Srinivas is the TOC sponsor for this project, has called for public comment and has approved a call for a public vote. (https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/6859)

Please vote (+1/0/-1) by replying to this thread.

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

--

Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...

Huabing Zhao,

Please review the recording https://youtu.be/zcTZ2pYPM9I you will hear us talk about the section in the main README that says to contact you directly via email. it may be good to point to the contributing markdown file instead etc. i've added you in the #toc channel for follow up.

-- Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 7:21 PM Huabing Zhao <zhaohuabing@...> wrote:

Hi Davanum, Amye,

I noticed that there's a to-do for Aeraki Mesh. Should I reach out to someone to proceed?

Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines

Thanks,

Huabing 

On Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 1:25 AM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:

Folks,

Please ping us on #toc channel or drop an email to the toc or private-toc mailing list if you have any questions after reviewing the video of the zoom call today. Please don't mind the short abbreviated response here, you will hear more of our concerns on the recording.

thanks,

Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:16 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:

The TOC met today to review the sandbox applications available at sandbox.cncf.io

• Clusterpedia  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Turnbuckle  - reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community: K8s wg-batch, sig-scheduling, sig-security
• pallet  -  reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community
• OpenCost - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, suggest engaging with the environmental sustainability WG
• Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines
• Curve - passes with a majority vote of the TOC,  will need license exception approval from the GB
• OpenFeature -   passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• kubewarden - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Hidra - will need to be relicensed, reapply in 6 months
• DevStream  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Hexa Policy Orchestration - present to TAG Security for clarity, IDQL language is unclear

July 26th is our next Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, we'll pick up from where we left off! 

--

Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...

--

Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims

--

Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims

The OpenTracing and OpenCensus communities seem to have blazed the way here with OpenTelemetry -- I don't know if they have any learnings that they'd want to share about what worked well, or what could have been done better.

---

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Davanum Srinivas via lists.cncf.io <davanum=gmail.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 3:27 AM
To: Nick Young <inocuo@...>
Cc: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] Policy question: What happens when projects merge?

 

⚠ External Email

Nick,

Thanks for reaching out. One of the main objectives of the process is to give assurance to the end users of CNCF projects that we as a community stand behind the projects they are using (esp graduated ones). So we cannot do this in good faith for Contour. So my feeling is that we should leave contour where it is now, put the effort on the replacement, figure out docs (esp migration etc) and slowly wean the community off contour onto the new replacement which is Envoy Gateway.

thanks,

Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:15 AM Nick Young <inocuo@...> wrote:

Hi TOC, and everyone else,

With the successful launch of Envoy Gateway, there's a question about what to do about Contour's lifecycle as an incubated project in the CNCF.

I firmly believe that Envoy Gateway's launch is a huge win for the cloud native landscape, and the deduplication of effort possible by having us all working together will prove worthwhile once we get something built.

Normally, there's a (reasonable) requirement for incubating projects to show motion in the direction of becoming graduated, and a timeline to become graduated. But it seems to me that graduation implies a level of "this will be supported for the foreseeable future" that I don't know is viable for Contour.

VMware has committed to ensuring our maintenance of the project will be ongoing until users are ready to move away, see [our blog](https://blogs.vmware.com/opensource/2022/05/16/contour-and-community-build-new-envoy-gateway/) for more details. To summarize that blog, Contour's VMware maintainers will be helping to ensure that current users of Contour are looked after with features and support as long as possible, Wearing my Contour maintainer hat, we're an incubating project that will, within the next year or two, be mostly obsoleted by a functional, production-ready Envoy Gateway.  This implies that I need to figure out what we're going to do about Contour's incubation status.

The scenario I had assumed is that Contour may not graduate, and personally this makes me a little sad, but I recognize the larger opportunity that Envoy Gateway represents for the cloud native community. I know this situation hasn't come up before, but I suspect that this won't be the last time that CNCF projects interact in this fashion. I’d definitely like the TOC’s guidance here rather than making assumptions though.

Should Contour stay in incubating until Envoy Gateway is a viable alternative and users have moved away, then be archived? The timeline for this I would see as at least two years.

I personally see this as a successful exit for Contour, and have heard it referred to as "the open-source version of being acquired", but it would be nice for the TOC to give both us and other projects who may run into this situation in the future some guidance here.

Thanks for your time, everyone!

Nick Young

Wearing two of my maintainer hats for this email (Contour and Envoy Gateway).

--

Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims

---

⚠ External Email: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Hi Davanum, Amye,

I noticed that there's a to-do for Aeraki Mesh. Should I reach out to someone to proceed?

Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines

Thanks,

Huabing 

On Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 1:25 AM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:

Folks,

Please ping us on #toc channel or drop an email to the toc or private-toc mailing list if you have any questions after reviewing the video of the zoom call today. Please don't mind the short abbreviated response here, you will hear more of our concerns on the recording.

thanks,

Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:16 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:

The TOC met today to review the sandbox applications available at sandbox.cncf.io

• Clusterpedia  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Turnbuckle  - reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community: K8s wg-batch, sig-scheduling, sig-security
• pallet  -  reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community
• OpenCost - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, suggest engaging with the environmental sustainability WG
• Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines
• Curve - passes with a majority vote of the TOC,  will need license exception approval from the GB
• OpenFeature -   passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• kubewarden - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Hidra - will need to be relicensed, reapply in 6 months
• DevStream  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Hexa Policy Orchestration - present to TAG Security for clarity, IDQL language is unclear

July 26th is our next Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, we'll pick up from where we left off! 

--

Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...

--

Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims

Folks,

Please ping us on #toc channel or drop an email to the toc or private-toc mailing list if you have any questions after reviewing the video of the zoom call today. Please don't mind the short abbreviated response here, you will hear more of our concerns on the recording.

thanks,

Dims

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:16 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:

The TOC met today to review the sandbox applications available at sandbox.cncf.io

• Clusterpedia  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Turnbuckle  - reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community: K8s wg-batch, sig-scheduling, sig-security
• pallet  -  reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community
• OpenCost - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, suggest engaging with the environmental sustainability WG
• Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines
• Curve - passes with a majority vote of the TOC,  will need license exception approval from the GB
• OpenFeature -   passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• kubewarden - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Hidra - will need to be relicensed, reapply in 6 months
• DevStream  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Hexa Policy Orchestration - present to TAG Security for clarity, IDQL language is unclear

July 26th is our next Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, we'll pick up from where we left off! 

--

Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...

--

Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims

The TOC met today to review the sandbox applications available at sandbox.cncf.io

• Clusterpedia  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Turnbuckle  - reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community: K8s wg-batch, sig-scheduling, sig-security
• pallet  -  reapply in 6 months with a more robust community, engage more with Kubernetes community
• OpenCost - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, suggest engaging with the environmental sustainability WG
• Aeraki Mesh  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC, establish open contribution guidelines
• Curve - passes with a majority vote of the TOC,  will need license exception approval from the GB
• OpenFeature -   passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• kubewarden - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Hidra - will need to be relicensed, reapply in 6 months
• DevStream  - passes with a majority vote of the TOC
• Hexa Policy Orchestration - present to TAG Security for clarity, IDQL language is unclear

July 26th is our next Sandbox Inclusion Meeting, we'll pick up from where we left off! 

--

Amye Scavarda Perrin | Director of Developer Programs, CNCF | amye@...

Hi TOC, and everyone else,

With the successful launch of Envoy Gateway, there's a question about what to do about Contour's lifecycle as an incubated project in the CNCF.

I firmly believe that Envoy Gateway's launch is a huge win for the cloud native landscape, and the deduplication of effort possible by having us all working together will prove worthwhile once we get something built.

Normally, there's a (reasonable) requirement for incubating projects to show motion in the direction of becoming graduated, and a timeline to become graduated. But it seems to me that graduation implies a level of "this will be supported for the foreseeable future" that I don't know is viable for Contour.

VMware has committed to ensuring our maintenance of the project will be ongoing until users are ready to move away, see [our blog](https://blogs.vmware.com/opensource/2022/05/16/contour-and-community-build-new-envoy-gateway/) for more details. To summarize that blog, Contour's VMware maintainers will be helping to ensure that current users of Contour are looked after with features and support as long as possible, Wearing my Contour maintainer hat, we're an incubating project that will, within the next year or two, be mostly obsoleted by a functional, production-ready Envoy Gateway.  This implies that I need to figure out what we're going to do about Contour's incubation status.

The scenario I had assumed is that Contour may not graduate, and personally this makes me a little sad, but I recognize the larger opportunity that Envoy Gateway represents for the cloud native community. I know this situation hasn't come up before, but I suspect that this won't be the last time that CNCF projects interact in this fashion. I’d definitely like the TOC’s guidance here rather than making assumptions though.

Should Contour stay in incubating until Envoy Gateway is a viable alternative and users have moved away, then be archived? The timeline for this I would see as at least two years.

I personally see this as a successful exit for Contour, and have heard it referred to as "the open-source version of being acquired", but it would be nice for the TOC to give both us and other projects who may run into this situation in the future some guidance here.

Thanks for your time, everyone!

Nick Young

Wearing two of my maintainer hats for this email (Contour and Envoy Gateway).

Q: Will this Working Group be held in an open forum similar to other CNCF Working Groups or is this suggesting a closed group?

A: We are revisiting the composition of this WG, please stay tuned for an alternate proposal.
Q: The representatives of the Code of Conduct Working Group - are they voting members and others (non-reps) are still able to participate?

A: With a new alternate composition of the WG, yes we will enable this.
Q: Again, who qualifies as an 'External Advisor' - and who selects the 'External Advisors'?

A: At the moment we have one which is Joanna Lee [1], who is helping us. I will let CNCF folks answer how Joanna came to be involved. from what i know, Joanna has been helping the GB meetings etc before and was available to help us with this.

Hoping this helps Karena.

Thanks,

Dims

[1] https://www.gesmer.com/team/joanna-lee/

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 11:39 PM Karena Angell <kangell@...> wrote:

Hi Dims,

I appreciate that you are addressing concerns. My questions are separate from Josh’s and really haven’t been answered either. Would be great if someone could provide real clarification.

Thanks,

Karena

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 7:53 PM Davanum Srinivas <davanum@...> wrote:

Josh,

back to the drawing board! https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/7127

thanks,

Dims

On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 7:10 PM Josh Berkus <jberkus@...> wrote:

On 6/10/22 14:54, Arun Gupta wrote:
> The group is critical that we'd like the TAG leadership, as opposed to a
> delegate, to be represented here directly.
>

Who is the "we" making these decisions?  Did the General Board vote on
this approach?

--
-- Josh Berkus
    Kubernetes Community Architect
    OSPO, OCTO

--

Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims

--

Karena Angell

Principal Product Manager, OpenShift

Red Hat OpenShift

kangell@...     

--

Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims