CNCF Governance Proposal


Alex Baretto
 

Hello all,

I've been reviewing the recent Graduation Proposal on behalf of Huawei. I have recently joined the TOC meetings so I may have missed some of the earlier discussions.

I have the following questions:
- I wanted some clarity on the styling of the graduation evaluation criteria. OSS project possess their idiosyncrasies, and whilst the proposal puts forward good ideas to capture these, the terminology may not clarify them sufficiently, as under the present proposal. 
- It may be good to consider inclusion of more explicit language regarding 
  -- "multiple end users" - we may want to specify whether this is more then 2 users or more than 3 users, etc.
  -- "committers from more than one organization..." - we may want to specify that this means having committers from more than two organizations
  -- "no longer can be recommended" - do we have detailed criteria in mind for non-recommendation? ASF? 
  -- "no longer represents best practices in its area" - similarly, do we have detailed criteria in mind?

Thank you.

Alexandre Baretto


alexis richardson
 

Alex

All discussion on this matter was in the doc, so you didn't miss
anything. Please DO feel free to suggest edits in the doc. That
would be great.

alexis

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Alex Baretto via cncf-toc
<cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io> wrote:
Hello all,

I've been reviewing the recent Graduation Proposal on behalf of Huawei. I
have recently joined the TOC meetings so I may have missed some of the
earlier discussions.

I have the following questions:
- I wanted some clarity on the styling of the graduation evaluation
criteria. OSS project possess their idiosyncrasies, and whilst the proposal
puts forward good ideas to capture these, the terminology may not clarify
them sufficiently, as under the present proposal.
- It may be good to consider inclusion of more explicit language regarding
-- "multiple end users" - we may want to specify whether this is more then
2 users or more than 3 users, etc.
-- "committers from more than one organization..." - we may want to
specify that this means having committers from more than two organizations
-- "no longer can be recommended" - do we have detailed criteria in mind
for non-recommendation? ASF?
-- "no longer represents best practices in its area" - similarly, do we
have detailed criteria in mind?

Thank you.

Alexandre Baretto
axbaretto@gmail.com

_______________________________________________
cncf-toc mailing list
cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io
https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc


Alex Baretto
 

Thanks, I will incorporate these therein.


On Sep 21, 2016 8:55 PM, "Alexis Richardson" <alexis@...> wrote:
Alex

All discussion on this matter was in the doc, so you didn't miss
anything.  Please DO feel free to suggest edits in the doc.  That
would be great.

alexis

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Alex Baretto via cncf-toc
<cncf-toc@...> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I've been reviewing the recent Graduation Proposal on behalf of Huawei. I
> have recently joined the TOC meetings so I may have missed some of the
> earlier discussions.
>
> I have the following questions:
> - I wanted some clarity on the styling of the graduation evaluation
> criteria. OSS project possess their idiosyncrasies, and whilst the proposal
> puts forward good ideas to capture these, the terminology may not clarify
> them sufficiently, as under the present proposal.
> - It may be good to consider inclusion of more explicit language regarding
>   -- "multiple end users" - we may want to specify whether this is more then
> 2 users or more than 3 users, etc.
>   -- "committers from more than one organization..." - we may want to
> specify that this means having committers from more than two organizations
>   -- "no longer can be recommended" - do we have detailed criteria in mind
> for non-recommendation? ASF?
>   -- "no longer represents best practices in its area" - similarly, do we
> have detailed criteria in mind?
>
> Thank you.
>
> Alexandre Baretto
> axbaretto@...
>
> _______________________________________________
> cncf-toc mailing list
> cncf-toc@...
> https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc
>


Dan Kohn <dan@...>
 

Thanks for the comments. I've incorporated changes based on your feedback to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l6e-hW7C3S6xJjGn47hUKKxeFBxiamAK7kn5efSryxY/edit#

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 7:57 PM, Alex Baretto via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote:
Hello all,

I've been reviewing the recent Graduation Proposal on behalf of Huawei. I have recently joined the TOC meetings so I may have missed some of the earlier discussions.

I have the following questions:
- I wanted some clarity on the styling of the graduation evaluation criteria. OSS project possess their idiosyncrasies, and whilst the proposal puts forward good ideas to capture these, the terminology may not clarify them sufficiently, as under the present proposal. 
- It may be good to consider inclusion of more explicit language regarding 
  -- "multiple end users" - we may want to specify whether this is more then 2 users or more than 3 users, etc.

Changed to at least 2

  -- "committers from more than one organization..." - we may want to specify that this means having committers from more than two organizations

Changed.

  -- "no longer can be recommended" - do we have detailed criteria in mind for non-recommendation? ASF? 

No, this is left to the discretion of the TOC. But the implication is that the world has changed significantly since adopting the project. It should certainly not come as a surprise.

  -- "no longer represents best practices in its area" - similarly, do we have detailed criteria in mind?

This is left intentionally vague. Note that the project is not "shut down" in any practical sense. It's simply a statement that CNCF/the TOC can no longer recommend the project, or cannot do so except with certain caveats.


Thank you.

Alexandre Baretto

--
Dan Kohn <mailto:dan@...>
Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation <https://cncf.io/>
tel:+1-415-233-1000


Alex Baretto
 

Thank you Dan

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 26, 2016, at 9:17 AM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote:

Thanks for the comments. I've incorporated changes based on your feedback to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l6e-hW7C3S6xJjGn47hUKKxeFBxiamAK7kn5efSryxY/edit#

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 7:57 PM, Alex Baretto via cncf-toc cncf-toc@... wrote:
Hello all,

I've been reviewing the recent Graduation Proposal on behalf of Huawei. I have recently joined the TOC meetings so I may have missed some of the earlier discussions.

I have the following questions:
- I wanted some clarity on the styling of the graduation evaluation criteria. OSS project possess their idiosyncrasies, and whilst the proposal puts forward good ideas to capture these, the terminology may not clarify them sufficiently, as under the present proposal. 
- It may be good to consider inclusion of more explicit language regarding 
  -- "multiple end users" - we may want to specify whether this is more then 2 users or more than 3 users, etc.

Changed to at least 2

  -- "committers from more than one organization..." - we may want to specify that this means having committers from more than two organizations

Changed.

  -- "no longer can be recommended" - do we have detailed criteria in mind for non-recommendation? ASF? 

No, this is left to the discretion of the TOC. But the implication is that the world has changed significantly since adopting the project. It should certainly not come as a surprise.

  -- "no longer represents best practices in its area" - similarly, do we have detailed criteria in mind?

This is left intentionally vague. Note that the project is not "shut down" in any practical sense. It's simply a statement that CNCF/the TOC can no longer recommend the project, or cannot do so except with certain caveats.


Thank you.

Alexandre Baretto

--
Dan Kohn <mailto:dan@...>
Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation <https://cncf.io/>
tel:+1-415-233-1000