Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Ken Haines <Kenneth.Haines@...>
+1 non-binding
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Thomas Schuetz via lists.cncf.io <thomas.schuetz=dynatrace.com@...>
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 12:15 PM To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Flux for incubation +1 non-binding
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Amye Scavarda Perrin via lists.cncf.io <ascavarda=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 7:40:33 PM To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Flux for incubation The Flux project has applied to move from sandbox to incubation: (https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/567)
The due diligence document can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z6yPN9-bWeVGpMrBxXJ3NBTBYZowJ3R93wKHEVmBJ1A/edit#heading=h.kd4eg2uz3lt0 Michelle Noorali has called for the vote: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5679 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 | Program Manager |
amye@...
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Thomas Schuetz
+1 non-binding
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Amye Scavarda Perrin via lists.cncf.io <ascavarda=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 7:40:33 PM To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Flux for incubation The Flux project has applied to move from sandbox to incubation: (https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/567)
The due diligence document can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z6yPN9-bWeVGpMrBxXJ3NBTBYZowJ3R93wKHEVmBJ1A/edit#heading=h.kd4eg2uz3lt0 Michelle Noorali has called for the vote: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5679 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 | Program Manager |
amye@...
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Eran Leib
+1 nb
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Pete Birley
+1 non-binding. Completely agree with Joe's sentiments, the composability of the v2 toolkit is incredibly flexible.
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 12:45 PM Joe Beda <jbeda@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Kunal Parmar <kunal@...>
+1 non-binding
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:40 AM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
+1 NB
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
banu.parasuraman@wipro.com
+1 , GitOps is the Way
Banu A Parasuraman Chief Technologist – Cloud Native +1-734-9287788
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of "Toni Menzel via lists.cncf.io" <toni.menzel=rebaze.com@...>
CAUTION:This email is received from an external domain. Open the hyperlink(s) & attachment(s) with caution.
+1 non-binding. Go GitOps! ;)
rebaze GmbH | Develop Like Tomorrow Developer focused Technology Consulting & Cloud Native Infrastructure. rebaze GmbH | +49 171 65 202 84 | toni.menzel@... | Twitter @tonit
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...>
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 7:40:33 PM To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Flux for incubation
The Flux project has applied to move from sandbox to incubation: (https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/567)
-- Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager | amye@...
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
+1 non-binding. Go GitOps! ;)
rebaze GmbH | Develop
Like Tomorrow
Developer focused Technology Consulting & Cloud Native Infrastructure.
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...>
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 7:40:33 PM To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Flux for incubation The Flux project has applied to move from sandbox to incubation: (https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/567)
The due diligence document can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z6yPN9-bWeVGpMrBxXJ3NBTBYZowJ3R93wKHEVmBJ1A/edit#heading=h.kd4eg2uz3lt0 Michelle Noorali has called for the vote: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5679 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 | Program Manager |
amye@...
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Justin Cormack
+1 binding.
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 6:40 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Ken Owens
+1 NB
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 12:40 PM Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Sheng Liang <sheng.liang@...>
+1 binding
From:
cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Amye Scavarda Perrin via lists.cncf.io <ascavarda=linuxfoundation.org@...> The Flux project has applied to move from sandbox to incubation: (https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/567)
-- Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager | amye@...
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
+1 nb
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Michelle Noorali <michelle.noorali@...>
+1 binding
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 1:45 PM Joe Beda <jbeda@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [VOTE] Flux for incubation
Joe Beda <jbeda@...>
+1 Non-binding.
I’m really excited by the “toolkit” approach that is part of flux2. That, for me, makes this much more useful in many more situations.
Joe
From:
cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Amye Scavarda Perrin <ascavarda@...> The Flux project has applied to move from sandbox to incubation: (https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/567)
-- Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager | amye@...
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
[VOTE] Flux for incubation
Amye Scavarda Perrin
The Flux project has applied to move from sandbox to incubation: (https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/567) The due diligence document can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z6yPN9-bWeVGpMrBxXJ3NBTBYZowJ3R93wKHEVmBJ1A/edit#heading=h.kd4eg2uz3lt0 Michelle Noorali has called for the vote: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/5679 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 | Program Manager | amye@...
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [cncf-flux-maintainers] [cncf-toc] Flux for Incubation Public Comment Period
Michelle Noorali <michelle.noorali@...>
Sounds great. We're ready to call for a vote then if you'll do the honors @Amye. Thanks all.
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 12:16 PM Liz Rice <liz@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: [cncf-flux-maintainers] [cncf-toc] Flux for Incubation Public Comment Period
Liz Rice
Thanks Michael, Daniel & Stefan for your responses - this all seems reasonable to me so you can consider my comments resolved :-)
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 6:37 PM Michael Bridgen <michael@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
KEDA Annual Review
Dear CNCF TOC, We are happy to share that the annual review for KEDA is open on https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/607. Kind regards, Tom Kerkhove Blog - blog.tomkerkhove.be
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Vote - renaming CNCF SIGs to TAGs
Liz Rice
In this week's meeting we talked about renaming CNCF SIGs to TAGs (Technical Advisory Group) to avoid confusion with the pre-existing Kubernetes SIGs. As discussed, the current confusion is real, especially where SIGs with the same name exist in both places. We also talked about holding votes through comments on GitHub. We are using this vote as an experiment of that mechanism, so please cast your vote on this issue (and not as response to this mailing list). https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues/549 Thanks, Liz
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Re: security & CNCF projects
Luke A Hinds
Not on the TOC, so hope it's ok to comment. I have the same concerns as Liz, quite often metrics are gathered without all factors considered. Take kubernetes for example, huge code base, huge user base and so many eyes looking to find vulnerabilities, compounded even more by a financial incentive with the bug bounty system. I monitor the hackone queue as a PSC member, and they come in thick and fast everyday (pleased to say most of them are invalids). This naturally results in a high vulnerability count, but it's not as simple as a high count equals bad project, if just means more have been discovered, not necessarily produced. I am also sceptical of using code scanners to assess the security posture of a project, great tools to use, but they do get it wrong and unless the false positives are constantly pruned out, they will make a project look much worse than it is. I can say this even after maintaining an OSS scanner project that hits around 100k downloads a week [0]
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:05 AM Liz Rice <liz@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||
|