+1 binding After some thought. I believe linkerd has met the incubation criteria. That is not hard to see. I am concerned that linkerd needs more momentum to sustain high quality development both from

Apologies, I shall miss tomorrow's meeting due to travel

Excellent! This is a project that will help a lot of our use cases

Welcome!

thank-you for the detailed summary, George!

congratulations NATS team! <caniszczyk@...> wrote:

Solomon Thank-you very much for your contributions to CNCF and the TOC. When we started, we had some support from a few leaders in the industry. Today, a lot of people are pushing CNCF forward. A big

Hi Apologies, I cannot attend the TOC call on March 20th. Chris & Ken, please could you drive? a

+1 binding

Bob, All, Thank-you all for your feedback on the Sandbox doc. Please don't send any more new names as suggestions. While all feedback is always welcome, I think the TOC settled on "Sandbox" already. W

+1 to that!

Yes, please! Also, you just called Chris British ;-)

Quinton Thank-you. Do you think the Sandbox write-up is sufficiently clear on that point? (I think it is, but keen to get this right). Ruben, all, We are intentionally lowering the bar so I am keen on

Garrett, Forgive me, I am not quite sure I follow. What is your recommendation for rexray in the context of your description below? A

Thank-you Richard, appreciate the thought that you and others have put into it.

Clint That's promising. What do the CSI people think? BTW, the name "REX-Ray" seems designed to direct the layperson's attention as far as possible from the stated purpose of the project. Might a more

If rexray and CSI benefit from "co evolution" then that might make sense. Is that the case? What does the community think?

Yes please do chime in!

Yes I think so. But really I am a storage idiot. Who else could we ask?

All - questions? (thanks Clint, this is super helpful) <clinton.kitson@...> wrote: