TOC, Proposal here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues/963 Can discuss at tommorrow's meeting. -- -- Josh Berkus Kubernetes Community Architect OSPO, OCTO

We put a lot of work into getting the survey down to 20 questions. That involved combining some questions where we felt it was safe. Leaving out Personal/Hobby was an oversight, though; we can add it

Tweet/LinkedIn For tweets please use @CloudNativeFdn handle, for LinkedIn, tag the CNCF* Open source contributors, CNCF projects want to hear about your contributor experience. Please take this survey

Hey, TOC: We still need 3 more TOC members to +1 this. Don't leave Catherine hanging! Thanks.

TOC, Vote: TAG Contributor Strategy would like to propose Catherine Paganini to be our third co-chair. We would like to nominate Catherine Paganini to be the third co-chair of TAG Contributor Strategy

Hey, folks: Could we have a few more binding votes on this? The mentoring WG team is eager to get started working on things, and (among other things) we can't make them part of the public CNCF calenda

For anyone who hasn't been following, the guidance says that the "real name" can be different from your "legal name".

What's the deadline for TAG-appointed approvers? I don't think I've seen one yet.

Can we get a clarification on "Real Names", please? That could resolve this. I'm sure other LF projects aren't turning away trans contributors ... is there language they use?

Dims, Can you explain how we reconcile this with the CNCF code of conduct? Asking because a simple reading of it would require "deadnaming" many of our trans contributors. How do we avoid that?

Dims, Kate, Matt, all: Here's the final on the charter for the Mentoring WG: https://github.com/cncf/tag-contributor-strategy/pull/188 Once you approve this, I'll update references elsewhere. -- -- Jo

These are really excellent ... and complicated! Had some minor feedback around wording in just a couple of places (submitted).

Wow, congrats!

Thank you for incorporating all of the community input into this plan.

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

In addition.

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?

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

That was what I assumed when each group was asked to appoint someone. In TAG-CS, we were already discussing who we would nominate. However, TAG chairs and core maintainers are the most overcommitted p

I'm confused by the updated criteria. For example, within TAG Contributor Strategy, we have several people who have direct expertise in CoCC formation. They are not our chairs. Shouldn't the COC-WG be