Enjoy, Cheryl! We will definitely miss you ... hopefully your new role means we get to see you again.

All, Since there's nowhere on the DD that reflects this, I wanted to remark that Linkerd's community managers have been tremendously active and helpful in creating CNCF's contributor recruitment guide

TOC, The chairs of TAG-Contributor Strategy have nominated Carolyn Van Slyck (Microsoft) to become the first Tech Lead for our TAG. Since she created and deployed the new https://contribute.cncf.io we

+1 NB As someone who frequently advises projects on how to get through the process, this is a huge step forwards.

+1 NB. As track lead for the Kubecon Storage Track, I've seen both of these candidates present, and they are obvious choices for SIG-Storage.

This is a great group. Good election! Welcome all!

My question is: is the *Helm project* asking for the CNCF to fund extended storage for these charts, or not? (assuming this is technically possible). I can see why the answer might be "not"; we have b

All, I'm really unclear on why CNCF would devote resources to maintaining a set of outdated Helm charts if the Helm project itself has decided not to do so. Wouldn't it be more sensible for us to use

+1 non-binding CNB has enough adoption that it's really not a sandbox project anymore.

TOC: We did't have quorum in today's meeting, so I opened our request as an issue, here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues/547 feel free to bikeshed on names, but please approve the existence of a su

We talked about requiring three things from projects reaching Graduated level: 1. A sustainability/longevity plan 2. A process for community feedback on the roadmap 3. Requiring "contributor ladder" p

Is there a referencable online version of that paper?

Yeah, I would love to see more of the other discussion on the gov-wg ML. Pick it up there? The "proof" is where it is. If there are people who are allowed to merge code/docs for the project and work f

This can actually be a great structure for a project with a small number of vendors doing most of the technical work, but larger number of users. The difficulty is recruiting users with a sufficient d

Hey, all: If you want to continue this discussion, I wanted to invite anyone interested to attend the Governance WG meeting on Tuesday at 10amPDT. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P9tQgCM6OwDHd1F8U

There's going to be a huge gap between the governance structures we *recommend* and the ones that are *acceptable to CNCF*. The CNCF was founded on having considerable autonmy for projects in governan

And for large projects like Helm, an SC has these benefits. Just like Kubernetes. But in smaller projects, where you're looking at a couple dozen regular contributors period, there's not a lot o benef

Then pick a better example of a steering committee. I don't know of a single example of a steering committee successfully evolving otherwise broken leadership within a project. Maybe you do? I've neve

Others have already gone over the issue of having positions and contributions accrue to companies and not individuals. Second, there's the fact that the 3 biggest corporate contributors get 100% of re

The Istio SC is a serious political problem, and the project has ongoing governance issues. Why would we want to emulate this with CNCF projects? An SC can be useful to a project that is large enough