|
Chris Aniszczyk
Hey all, hope everyone is having a great 2018! The next TOC meeting will be in a week, on Jan 16th and we'll resume our usual schedule of meetings the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month.
We have some projects in the proposal stage seeking community due diligence that we started late last year:
Thanks to everyone who has already put the time in reviewing the proposals. We expect to vote on projects proposals in the coming weeks.
See everyone next Tuesday!
-- Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
|
|
|
To add: Nats DD is going well, I now need a few more existing or new people who can help review the DD material please. On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote: Hey all, hope everyone is having a great 2018! The next TOC meeting will be
in a week, on Jan 16th and we'll resume our usual schedule of meetings the
1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month.
We have some projects in the proposal stage seeking community due diligence
that we started late last year:
OPA: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/71
Rook: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/57
SPIFFE: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/68
Vitess: https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/67
Thanks to everyone who has already put the time in reviewing the proposals.
We expect to vote on projects proposals in the coming weeks.
See everyone next Tuesday!
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@...
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc
|
|
|
Hi Alexis
I don’t see a PR for the NATS proposal? Is there one?
Thanks
Q
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
To add:
Nats DD is going well, I now need a few more existing or new people
who can help review the DD material please.
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc
Hey all, hope everyone is having a great 2018! The next TOC meeting will be
in a week, on Jan 16th and we'll resume our usual schedule of meetings the
1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month.
We have some projects in the proposal stage seeking community due diligence
that we started late last year:
Thanks to everyone who has already put the time in reviewing the proposals.
We expect to vote on projects proposals in the coming weeks.
See everyone next Tuesday!
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
|
|
|
It's all in a Google Doc, we haven't made a pr yet.
All, please email me for access
Hi Alexis
I don’t see a PR for the NATS proposal? Is there one?
Thanks
Q
To add:
Nats DD is going well, I now need a few more existing or new people
who can help review the DD material please.
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc
Hey all, hope everyone is having a great 2018! The next TOC meeting will be
in a week, on Jan 16th and we'll resume our usual schedule of meetings the
1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month.
We have some projects in the proposal stage seeking community due diligence
that we started late last year:
Thanks to everyone who has already put the time in reviewing the proposals.
We expect to vote on projects proposals in the coming weeks.
See everyone next Tuesday!
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
|
|
|
Wouldn’t it be preferable to do the preparation of the proposal in a Google Doc, and then commence the actual due diligence exercise with a PR (the way most of the other proposals have worked)? That way it would be clear when exactly the proposal is submitted,
and the proper record of due diligence comments/feedback would be available in GitHub for all to see.
As opposed to in this case where the document has been through various revisions in multiple documents, and it’s not been clear when the transition from document preparation to technical due diligence occurred?
Q
Quinton Hoole
Technical Vice President
America Research Center
2330 Central Expressway, Santa Clara, CA 95050
Tel: 408-330-4721 Cell: 408-320-8917 Office # E2-9
Email:
quinton.hoole@...
ID#Q00403160
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
It's all in a Google Doc, we haven't made a pr yet.
All, please email me for access
Hi Alexis
I don’t see a PR for the NATS proposal? Is there one?
Thanks
Q
To add:
Nats DD is going well, I now need a few more existing or new people
who can help review the DD material please.
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc
Hey all, hope everyone is having a great 2018! The next TOC meeting will be
in a week, on Jan 16th and we'll resume our usual schedule of meetings the
1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month.
We have some projects in the proposal stage seeking community due diligence
that we started late last year:
Thanks to everyone who has already put the time in reviewing the proposals.
We expect to vote on projects proposals in the coming weeks.
See everyone next Tuesday!
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
|
|
|
maybe, nonetheless we are using a g/doc currently
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 6:55 PM, Quinton Hoole <quinton.hoole@...> wrote:
Wouldn’t it be preferable to do the preparation of the proposal in a Google Doc, and then commence the actual due diligence exercise with a PR (the way most of the other proposals have worked)? That way it would be clear when exactly the proposal is submitted,
and the proper record of due diligence comments/feedback would be available in GitHub for all to see.
As opposed to in this case where the document has been through various revisions in multiple documents, and it’s not been clear when the transition from document preparation to technical due diligence occurred?
Q
It's all in a Google Doc, we haven't made a pr yet.
All, please email me for access
Hi Alexis
I don’t see a PR for the NATS proposal? Is there one?
Thanks
Q
To add:
Nats DD is going well, I now need a few more existing or new people
who can help review the DD material please.
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc
Hey all, hope everyone is having a great 2018! The next TOC meeting will be
in a week, on Jan 16th and we'll resume our usual schedule of meetings the
1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month.
We have some projects in the proposal stage seeking community due diligence
that we started late last year:
Thanks to everyone who has already put the time in reviewing the proposals.
We expect to vote on projects proposals in the coming weeks.
See everyone next Tuesday!
--
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
|
|
|
no, you have to remove yourself.
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 6:57 PM, Paul Kochanski <paul.kochanski@...> wrote:
Please remove me from this list
Paul Kochanski
Director of Business Development
978-430-9159
Wouldn’t it be preferable to do the preparation of the proposal in a Google Doc, and then commence the actual due diligence exercise with a PR (the way most of the other proposals have worked)? That way it would be clear when exactly the
proposal is submitted, and the proper record of due diligence comments/feedback would be available in GitHub for all to see.
As opposed to in this case where the document has been through various revisions in multiple documents, and it’s not been clear when the transition from document preparation to technical due diligence occurred?
Quinton Hoole
Technical Vice President
It's all in a Google Doc, we haven't made a pr yet.
All, please email me for access
I don’t see a PR for the NATS proposal? Is there one?
Nats DD is going well, I now need a few more existing or new people
who can help review the DD material please.
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc
Hey all, hope everyone is having a great 2018! The next TOC meeting will be
in a week, on Jan 16th and we'll resume our usual schedule of meetings the
1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month.
We have some projects in the proposal stage seeking community due diligence
that we started late last year:
Thanks to everyone who has already put the time in reviewing the proposals.
We expect to vote on projects proposals in the coming weeks.
See everyone next Tuesday!
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
|
|
|
In the last message on the email thread on this in November it was mentioned that there were still some outstanding todo’s before the doc could be considered ready of due diligence review. Some of them still appear to be missing:
===
Remaining TODOs:
- Categorize NATS integrations
- Link to an architectural overview
- Provide additional benchmarks (if this is still applicable).
===
Should we consider the document complete and ready for due diligence review, or still work in progress?
Q
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
maybe, nonetheless we are using a g/doc currently
|
|
|
here is the doc
I would be grateful if people from this list could now consider it open for feedback, especially with a view to answering edge questions like those in the list below, and more broadly to *splaining messaging
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 7:13 PM, Quinton Hoole <quinton.hoole@...> wrote:
In the last message on the email thread on this in November it was mentioned that there were still some outstanding todo’s before the doc could be considered ready of due diligence review. Some of them still appear to be missing:
===
Remaining TODOs:
- Categorize NATS integrations
- Link to an architectural overview
- Provide additional benchmarks (if this is still applicable).
===
Should we consider the document complete and ready for due diligence review, or still work in progress?
Q
From: Alexis Richardson < alexis@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 10:56
maybe, nonetheless we are using a g/doc currently
|
|
|
