►
From YouTube: CNCF SIG App Delivery 2020-03-04
Description
CNCF SIG App Delivery 2020-03-04
A
A
A
B
B
B
Hello,
my
name
is
Lee
and
I'm
a
co-chair
of
C
gap,
delivery,
so
I
think
it's
a
time
for
us
to
start
the
I
think
a
priori
of
still
CF
meeting
this
time.
So
we
do
have
some
agendas
in
today's
meeting
notes.
I
actually
noticed
they
are
civil
topics
for
discussion,
so
the
first
one
is
that
the
helm,
graduation
and
the
I
will
try
to
share
my
screen
just
a
one
minute.
C
C
Looking
at
that
day,
I
figured
we'd
talk
about
it
in
the
sake
and
so
I've
got
the
I
haven't
submitted
the
pull
request
yet
I'm,
actually
putting
it
together,
based
on
that
existing
document,
along
with
the
due
diligence
and
architecture,
Docs
they're,
not
quite
done,
but
I
can
walk
through
those.
So
people
can
understand.
Would
that
help
yeah.
C
The
first
section
was
have
committers
from
two
organizations
and
I
outlined
that
we
actually
have
committers
from
more
than
two
organizations
so
for
the
primary
project,
the
helm,
CLI.
We
have
maintainer
committers
from
seven
different
organizations,
and
we
also
have
that
many
for
the
overall
governance.
We
have
an
org
maintainer
z--,
who
are
sort
of
like
the
kubernetes
steering
committee.
C
We
also
have
maintainer
from
seven
different
organizations
for
that
that
span
multiple
cont
countries
and
continents,
and
that
kind
of
thing
the
next
one
is
achieved:
the
and
maintained
a
core
infrastructure,
best
practices,
badge
we're
actually
one
step
away
from
hitting
silver
and
that's
the
security
assurance
documentation
and
the
pull
request
is
up
for
that.
It's
a
twenty
page
white
paper
that
follows
the
security,
assurances
and
documents,
the
architecture
for
that.
C
It's
kind
of
nice
that
we
have
Matt
butcher,
who
wrote
that
he
has
a
PhD
in
philosophy,
which
means
you
know,
gonna
argue,
and
so
he
wrote
that
up
and
there's
just
a
couple
of
minor
pieces
of
feedback
to
it,
just
just
tweaked
and
some
details
to
add.
But
otherwise
it
looks
good.
We'll
probably
have
that
done
by
the
end
of
this
week.
So
not
only
do
we
have
the
best
practices,
but
it
looks
like
before
we
get
before
the
GOC.
We'll
also
have
the
silver
patch.
C
The
independent
security
audit
that
happened
end
of
last
year
here
you
can
read
a
snippet
from
the
conclusion.
This
is
just
a
copied,
snippet
from
them,
and
here
53s
take
on
it.
This
is
who
one
of
the
company
is
that
the
CNC
F
has
hired
to
do
security
audits
and
that's
who
they
chose
in
this
particular
instance.
B
C
The
next
is
the
governance.
We've
had
a
documented
governance
and
been
using
it
for
I
think
since
August
September
of
2018,
and
we
have
the
team's
documented.
So
we
have
more
than
one
team
and
the
teams
are
documented
who
they
are
and
where
they're
at
there's
a
question
here
of.
Is
there
a
level
badge
data
for
graduation
and
the
level
stated
for
graduation
is
just
to
achieve
the
security
best
or
the
best
practices
badge
which
we
have
long
done
going
silver
is
far
beyond
it.
C
Okay,
in
the
adopter
section,
we
didn't
have
an
adopters
file,
so
we
recently
added
one
and
we're
only
organizations
that
are
okay,
having
their
name
put
on
it,
I've
started
to
add
their
names.
The
helm
website
also
has
a
number
of
companies
names
on
it,
who
have
given
their
okay
to
have
their
branding
on
it.
So
there's
a
handful
of
companies
we
have
listed
here,
then
the
helm
hub
has
over
150
people
and
organizations,
who've
listed
their
helm
repositories
and
that's
a
sign
that
they
use
it.
C
C
Then
there
is
the
link
to
the
due
diligence
document
since
helm
came
in
before
the
current
due
diligence
here,
I
linked
to
the
incubating
proposal
that
was
merged
in
the
due
diligence.
I
do
start
to
touch
on
the
things
that
have
changed
for
incubation,
but
I
wanted
to
link
to
the
original
incubating
proposal
in
this,
and
there
are
currently
no
outstanding
concerns
or
recommendations
that
he'll
needs
to
tackle.
So
this
is
following
that
format
that
Michelle
put
together.
Are
there
any
questions
about
this
before
I
move
into
the
due
diligence
document?
So.
B
B
B
D
C
So
I'll
go
check,
but
this
is
where
it's
confusing
of
what
exactly
we
need
to
provide,
because
all
existing
incubation
projects
never
provided
the
current
duty
diligence
because
they
all
came
in
before
the
process
existed.
A
link
to
the
incubation
due
diligence
doesn't
provide
you
with
the
due
diligence
and
the
past
projects
that
have
gone
through.
All
of
this,
like
Vitesse,
was
the
last
one.
I
think
that
went
in
they
provided
this
form
of
due
diligence,
and
so
it's
confusing
whether
or
not
it
needs
to
be
provided.
E
B
Personally,
I'm,
not
very
sure
about
the
a
person
from
my
understanding,
is
that
due
diligence
is
only
needed
for
a
project
if
they
want
to
code
from
the
incubation
level,
so
I
think
I,
don't
know
if
they've
here
we
may
want
to
discuss
about
about
this
issue
with
TLC.
So
what
ez
expecting
delivery
or
documentation
help
team
need
to
provide
for
the
new
graduation
process.
I
know
that
we
have
seek,
because
before.
B
B
C
Quite
frankly,
like
the
history
of
helm,
I
bet
you
most
people
have
no
idea
how
and
why
home
even
came
to
be
that
spurred
it
and
and
what
happened,
and
so
some
of
that
context
is
probably
going
to
be
useful
in
understanding
what
it
is.
Why
it's,
why
it's
there
and
so
I'll
share
a
bit
of
that,
but
I'm
partly
done
with
the
stuff
and
I
will
verify.
Michelle
has
been
doing
this
process,
so
I
will
double
check
with
her
on
whether
the
due
diligence
does
need
to
be
filled
out.
F
Completely
actually,
yesterday,
during
the
public
gypsy
meeting,
Michelle
proposed
a
revised
version
for
a
graduation,
and
this
I'm
still
going
through
that
at
moment
at
the
moment,
I
don't
have
the
full
details
of
how
we
go
about
it,
but
they've
added
me
and
I
will
come
back
to
you.
That's
okay,
okay,.
C
C
C
We
talked
about
the
high
velocity
in
the
number
of
project
here,
oh
that
our
high
quality.
Here
we
list
some
organizations
later
on,
where
it
asks
for
more
organizations
that
give
more
use
cases,
but
there's
large
organizations
like
IBM
Samsung,
Microsoft,
VMware,
bitNami,
CERN
I've,
linked
to
some
of
the
public
presentations
on
it.
We've
already
got
that
we've
gone
to
do
we
follow
the
principles.
We've
actually
always
followed
the
CNCs
principles,
I'm,
not
sure
how
to
address
it.
In
the
original
incubation
document
we
actually
have
a
statement
about
following
the
principles.
C
C
We
talked
about
the
scope:
how
it's
useful
helm?
Is
a
package
manager
we're
not
trying
to
be
every
deployment
tool
out
there,
something
like
we've
works
or
flux.
Let's
know
a
CNC
F
project
can
use
helm
because
they
have
the
flux
op
for
home
as
a
building
block,
we're
not
trying
to
jump
into
scope
outside
of
that
part
of
the
document.
I
talk
about
what's
in
scope
and
what's
out
of
scope,
comes
a
package
manager,
we're
not
gonna,
try
and
do
everything
else.
C
C
B
C
C
It
detects
changes
and
it
pulls
in
it's
kind
of
like
the
difference
between
traditional
ansible
and
chef
right
ones,
more
push
ones
more
pull
in
the
traditional
sense,
although
there
are
ways
to
use
ansible
in
the
poll,
and
so
you
might
use
something
like
get
ops
to
do
that,
pull
model
based
on
configuration
somewhere
and
you
can
use
helm
in
that,
and
so
the
operator
that
flux
uses
is
just
built
on
top
of
home.
They've
used
home
as
a
building
block
in
order
to
use
the
packages,
pull
them
in
install
them
and
update
them.
C
Just
like
chef
might
use
apt
packages
to
install
and
update
things.
It's
a
dependency
they
use,
so
our
relationship
is
in
that
way.
We
built
a
dependency
we've
taken
feedback
from
them
on
features,
and
things
like
that,
because
other
tools
want
to
build
on
top
of
helm
version,
3
made
a
lot
of
improvements
to
the
go
API
in
order
to
try
to
make
those
use
cases
better
and
more
clear
and
easier
to
implement
in
the
importing
tools.
We
worked
on
that
as
part
of
helm,
3,
but
that's
kind
of
our
relationship.
There
is.
C
C
If
folks
don't
know
for
a
long
time,
there
have
been
people
such
as
AT&T
folks
at
et
who
deploy
OpenStack
into
kubernetes
using
helm,
which
is
the
most
complicated
deployment
of
an
application
into
kubernetes
that
I'm,
aware
of,
and
that's
I
used
to
work
on
OpenStack
years
and
years
and
years
ago.
So
I'm
familiar
with
its
complexity
and
it's
actually
turned
now
over
time
that
the
tools
they've
built
around
it
is
now.
C
C
Openstack
actually
has
cases
where
one
thing
has
to
be
installed,
come
up
and
be
functional
before
the
next
thing
is
installed,
which
of
course,
you
can't
do
in
a
declarative
model
as
you've
got
operators
and
things
like
that,
but
they've
long
done
tooling
around
this
even
before
CRTs
and
custom
controllers
were
an
option.
It's
a
fascinating
use
case.
You've
never
dug
into
it.
C
C
If
you
go
to
do,
we
have
growth
according
to
the
CN
CF
dashboard,
which
I
linked
here,
there's
only
two
CN
CF
projects
that
have
more
commits
in
the
past
year
and
that's
G
RPC
with
all
of
the
parts
of
that
and
kubernetes
itself.
No
other
scenes
you
have
projects
have
more
commits
contributions
to
it,
so
we
are
able
to
maintain
and
handle
this
high
velocity.
C
This
is
all
the
basic
things
like
the
organization
and
and
things
like
that,
our
release
methodology,
it
is
documented.
We
have
a
documented
release.
Methodology
for
the
CLI
follow
semantic
versioning
in
here
I
talked
about
four
major
and
minor
releases.
We
use
release
branches
that
have
release
candidates
and
then
any
patch
releases
we
cherry-pick
fixes
on
for
those
patch
releases.
We
also
do
provide
a
hash,
a
shot
to
56
hash
of
every
stable
release
and
their
PGP
sign
and
the
keys
are
provided
in
the
release.
C
Notes
of
the
fingerprint
is
so
you
know
who
it
is,
and
the
fingerprint
so
people
who
do
want
to
verify
have
that
capability,
and
we
know
there
are
people
who
download
and
verify
the
PGP
signed
releases,
and
all
of
this
is
documented
in
our
process.
I
haven't
finished
the
community
size
and
existing
sponsorship.
Section
I
started
to
type
it
then
I
get
into
the
technical
which
deals
with
the
architecture.
Here
we
I
talk
about
what
can
be
accomplished
to
the
architecture
document
covered
kind
of
what
we
were
just
talking
about.
C
It's
not
done
yet,
though,
what
can
be
accomplished?
It's
a
package
manager,
nothing
more,
nothing
less
with
reasonable
effort.
You
can
get
it's
a
poll
model
like
we
are
talking
about,
and
flux
provides.
Some
of
those
things
what's
kind
of
in
scope
in
the
current
roadmap
is
dealing
with
OCI
registries,
so
helm
has
its
own
repositories
right
now
to
pass
charts
around
and
to
share
them.
But
one
of
the
things
the
OCI
is
working
on.
C
The
open
container
initiative
is
storing
other
artifacts
besides
container
images
in
the
registries,
and
they
have
its
helm
along
with
a
handful
of
our
projects,
are
working
with
them
to
figure
out
how
that
works.
It's
experimental
effect
you
have
to
in
helm
itself.
You
have
to
enable
experimental
features
to
use
this
right
now.
C
That's
because
the
OCI
isn't
ready
to
do
more,
we've
kind
of
been
pushing
the
bleeding
edge
with
them
and
trying
to
push
them
along,
but
we're
not
there
yet
and
eventually
we'd
like
to
use
notary
and
the
other
signing
capabilities
for
the
OCI
registries
in
order
to
do
our
security
and
validation.
But
it's
not
there
yet,
just
because
the
OCI
isn't
there,
but
that's
in
scope.
That's
in
the
roadmap!
B
C
And
I
think
they're
targeting
their
next
meeting
on
the
17th
for
graduation
proposals
and
if
I
remember
right,
there
are
currently
three
outstanding
graduation
proposals,
helm
included,
that
would
that
they'd
like
to
review,
and
so
the
goal
is
in
their
next
meeting
on
the
17th
to
start
reviewing
them
unless
there's
some
reason
not
to
review
this
or
some
piece
of
information
that
needs
to
be
filled
in.
So
please
let
us
know
and
I'll
try
to
get
this
information
up
tomorrow.
Sometime
I
expect
it'll.
C
B
G
G
It's
been
a
long
intention
that
we
will
submit
this
to
CN
CF
indoor,
starting
with
sandbox,
even
when
since
I
have
started
a
separate
work
group
called
chaos.
Engineering
now
that
we
have
achieved
1.0
and
there
are
many
organizations
using
it-
I
think
its
in
used
by
more
than
10
enterprises,
which
are
using
litmus,
if
needs
more
governance,
open
covenants
by
CN
CF,
so
that
the
community
can
grow,
and
we
already
have
contributors
more
than
50
contributors
and
good
number
of
github
scores.
G
We
believe
I
think
it's
in
a
good
shape
with
given
the
community
interactions
that
are
happening.
I
had
been
involved
in
submitting
one
another
project
to
sandbox,
which
was
open
ideas,
but
the
process
were
old
at
that
time.
I
believe
that
a
lot
of
processes
were
upgraded
now
and
CN
CF
for
any
of
the
projects
to
go
into
a
the
sandbox
or
intubation
or
graduation
I
just
saw
Matt
going
to
a
very
detailed
work
up
for
help.
Graduation,
so
I
just
thought.
G
B
A
B
So
the
new
process
is
like
okay,
you
need
to
send
a
pro
request
to
the
scenes
of
toc
even
revolve,
and
the
difference
from
the
previous
purpose
process
is
that
you
can.
If
you
check
the
person
you'll
see
that
so,
for
example,
you
are
doing
these
ten
box
right
at
seven
bucks.
Actually
it
comes
to
there
as
a
low
bar
and
low
barrier
and
project
donation
also
means
you
need
to.
B
You
know,
try
to
present
your
project
into
a
say,
I
know,
I,
think
your
project
actually
presented
it
before,
but
I
think
it's
quite
a
long
time
ago.
So
I
will
suggest.
We
folks
prepare
another
presentation
in
case
there
are
some.
You
know,
change
and
also
to
remind
people
about
the
the
features
of
your
project.
So
I
think
you
all
need
to
prepare
another
presentation
and
after
the
presentation,
the
sequel
working
on
the
so
called
recommendation
about
the
project.
B
The
standard
recommendation
in
there
for
more
documentation,
which
is
normally
a
template
of
due
diligence,
documentation,
choose
2qz
and
until
say,
they'll,
say:
ok,
I
am
interested
in
the
project.
I
want
to
sponsor,
and
then
you
can
move
me
move
forward
if
there
are
three
toz
and
actually
this
me
to
the
appointment
for
estella
box
project,
so
I
think
it's
quite
straightforward.
You
can
fill
up
the
affected.
Yeah
yeah
great.
G
B
G
B
C
B
D
D
A
C
Say
is
I'm
going
through
this
graduation
stuff.
It
has
been
a
significant
amount
of
work
on
my
part
to
do
and
relearn
in
to
ask
questions
and
to
figure
out
and
to
ask
everybody
to
go
through
this
with
all
of
the
churn
and
changes
is
a
significant
amount
of
work
to
put
on
people
who
are
proposing
projects
or
going
through
steps,
and
it's
paperwork,
long
form
paperwork
that
just
takes
a
lot
of
time
to
do,
and
so
that's
problematic
for
everybody.
Who's
got
to
do
this
and
spend
lots
of
hours
on
it.
B
So
I
think
we
are
actually
mixing
a
lot
of
different
problems
here,
so
I
believe
for
incubation
and
a
graduation
process.
You
should
expect
that
it
may
be
not
a
very
short
term,
because
you
know
the
criteria
is
quite
I
mean
the
bar
is
quite
high
for
both
incubation
and
even
higher
for
graduation.
That
is
required
for
and
I
also
clear,
the
very
clearly
clearly
on
the
sincerity
of
the
documentation.
So
that
will
be
one
case
and
for
the
other
case
is
for
Senate
box
project
first
days.
B
I
will
expect
it
not
be
too
long
because
it's
considered
on
low
barrier,
I,
think
kudu
and
some
other
project
experienced
before
smelly,
because
this
process
actually
does
not
exist
or
there's
no
clear
definition
about
what
easy
process
for
Santa
Box
project
man.
There
is
sick
because
sake
is
a
new
thing,
so
I
will
I'll
expect
that
the
bracelet
project
I'll
only
have
this
percentage
will
don't
have
to
suffer
from
a
very
long
process
for
setbacks
in
connection
not
even
my
punim,
you
I
I,
don't
know
yeah.
D
Specifically
talking
about
livers
as
a
another
sandbox
process
project
coming
in
and
shoring
up
that
process
and
multiple
stakes
there,
I
worry,
I
worry,
I,
guess
with
the
low
barrier
entry
that
that
we're
adding
levels
with
I
I
would
just
ask
for
like
like
like.
What's
the
what's
like
is
the
original
guidance,
the
litmus
comes
to
gabart
delivery?
Was
that
all
inclusive
or
should
litmus
expect
that
the
TOC
might
continue
them
through
multiple
stages?
This
process,
given
that
sandbox
is
supposed
to
be
this
early
stage?
Experimentation!
H
Just
to
make
this
short
I
think
a
couple
of
statements
here.
The
reason
why,
for
especially
are
ago
and
the
operator
frame
of
this
process
was
understandably
painful-
was
because
that
was
during
that
phase.
Where
I
was
he
a
stick,
the
CMG
Atlas
protists
had
to
be
defined,
so
it
should
not
be
that
hard,
I
think
a
certain
level
of
information,
especially
to
the
second
DTU
C's
required
to
understand
a
president,
has
to
be
made
kind
of
like
simple
for
them
to
consume.
H
It
and
I
think
it's
also
an
interest
by
having
access
to
this
CN
CF
ecosystem
to
you
to
invest
some
of
that
time.
On
the
seek
assignment,
usually
there's
one
sick,
that's
the
primary
sick!
That's
reviewing
a
pro
trick
that
gets
assigned
to
it.
In
some
cases
a
sick
might
say:
well,
there
are
specific
aspects,
so
we
want
to
have
a
second
opinion
on
a
project
but
and
generally
for
sandbox
projects
to
to
the
litmus
question.
H
I
G
No,
that
that's
clearly
understood
and
that
this
process
itself
is
more
clearly
defined,
so
most
likely
TOC
will
recommend
to
come
back
to
this.
Secondly,
and
because
yeah
that's
what
was
recommended
by
Chris
a
is
most
likely
that
does
not
change.
This
is
helpful.
I
will
go
through
that
process.
I'm
pretty
straightforward.
D
G
I,
don't
have
any
due
diligence
form
I
mean
just
I'm
going
to
this
process.
It
says
first
send
out
a
pull
request
and
go
through
the
triage
process
where
they
will
ask
you
to
go
and
pick
a
particular
sake
and
present
it.
Then
that's
where
I
am
going
to
come
back
here
right
at
that
time,
the
due
diligence
form
from
the
sake
will
be
filled
out
and
then
I
take
it
from
there.
Is
that
good
understanding.
I
C
Can
I
ask
a
question
err
just
just
to
kind
of
fill
in
on
the
process
here,
so
in
the
last
meeting
Kudo
presented
here,
they
were
triage.
They
were
sent
over
to
this
sake
they
presented,
and
so
the
next
step
was
to
do
due
diligence
and
things
out
of
this
cig.
Do
we
know
who
owns
doing
that
work
from
this
cig
in
order
to
present
to
the
TOC
for
Kudo,
because
we've
kind
of
got
the
steps
along
and
now
we're
at
kind
of
due
diligence
of
talking
about
it?.
C
This
actually
goes
to
a
great
question
of
who
is
supposed
to
fill
out
that
form
whose
responsibility
I've
noticed
the
projects
doing
it,
but
from
what
I
can
tell
it's
actually
supposed
to
be
the
SIG's
doing
it
so
I'm
filling
it
out
for
home,
because
I
know
other
people
don't
have
the
context,
but
the
context
that
I
got
was
it
was
the
project
or
the
SIG's
are
supposed
to
fill
it
out
and
so
I
think
who
owns
something
and
is
supposed
to
do.
It
is
not
communicated
clearly.
H
In
specific
sessions,
looking
at
that
content,
working
with
them,
but
I
mean,
but
quite
frankly,
we
are
also
doing
this
at
the
top
of
our
additional
work
and
for
a
certain
order
of
protein,
we
can
fill
everything
out.
What
we
are
providing
is
actually
the
guidance
that
everything
is
prepared
so
that
you
see
can
take
it
over,
but
we
won't
be
filling
out
all
these
forms
and
collecting
all
this
information.
That's
not
going
to
happen.
H
D
H
C
Guess
what
I'm
saying
here
is
the
documentation
in
the
process
today
says
it's
driven
by
your
TOC
sponsor.
So
if
you
approach
this
project-
and
you
say-
oh
I
got
to
do
my
due
diligence
right
and
you
go
to
the
process,
documentation
supposed
to
say
my
TOC
sponsor
supposed
to
do
it
and
then
in
this
meeting
we're
saying
well,
we
can't
you
know
the
sake
oversees
it
and
the
projects
are
supposed
to
fill
it
out
because
they
didn't.
You
know
to
have
all
that
information.
C
That's
different
than
the
documentation
and
so
I'm
saying
the
what's
happening
in
action
doesn't
match
the
documented
process,
which
means
that
needs
to
be
reconciled.
Otherwise,
it's
confusion,
whereas
the
documentation,
the
expectations
of
people
showing
up,
does
it
haven't
been
through
this
and
trying
to
navigate
this
doesn't
match.
Reality
doesn't
match
documentation.
D
If
there's
something
I'm
doing
wrong,
I
want
to
know
it
now
not
when
I
come
to,
but
not
when
I
get
that
form
back
and
we
submit
back
and-
and
we
start
this
all
over
again,
I
just
I
want
to
build
it
like
a
clear
engine
right
from
from
us
getting
in
the
sandbox
and
sandbox
all
the
way
to
graduation,
and
it
just
wastes
all
of
our
time.
If
we
don't
have
that
that
that
clarity,
like
it
wastes
your
time
right-
oh
it's
like
hairy
like
I,
don't
want
to
do
that
either
trust.
H
Me,
but
we
have
learned
in
this
process,
we
have
provided
this
feedback
to
the
team,
see.
That's
also
why
we
now
come
up
with
together
with
the
other
six
with
these
new
documentation,
so
we
put
forward
in
the
best
interest
of
the
projects
you
can
a
please
be
sure
that
no
work
is
been
done
in
vain
for
the
pros,
like
with
the
due
diligence
document.
That's
now
a
document
that
has
been
agreed,
amongst
the
sake
and
also
with
with
the
TOC
based
on
our
work
and
we're
all
working
to
improve
the
process.
H
So,
if
you're
in
doubt
whether
you
should
do
something,
it's
the
easiest
to
ask
us,
because
either
we
as
the
signatures
can
answer
it
directly
or
we
work
directly
with
city
of
Sirius
onto
to
do
this.
What
has
worked
by
now?
Is
we
usually
that
you
see
says
yes
every
point
on
its
process
like
the
overall?
Yes,
we
want
to
have
a
look
at
it
or
don't
want
to
look
at
it,
assigns
it
to
the
sick,
sick.
Does
the
review?
H
H
That
used
to
take
a
bit
longer
than
they
should
be
taking
in
the
very
beginning.
Your
project
has
involved,
in
the
meantime,
see
this
as
an
opportunity
to
present
a
more
updated
version
than
the
one
which
we
have
already
done
and
I
understand
the
frustration
here.
Don't
don't
don't
get
me
wrong,
I'm
in
a
submission
process
myself
that
has
been
going
on
for
a
while.
H
G
D
Like
I've
got
plenty
of
other
things
to
be
frustrated
about,
like,
like
I,
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
like
like,
we
help
build
and
learn
from
those
who
are
coming.
You
know
like
those
who
come
before,
or
those
who
come
after
and
and
make
sure
that,
like
we
clarify
these
things
right
like
of
course
like
this
whole
thing's
is
still
very
much
a
storming
phase
right,
we're
all
figuring
this
out
and
and
there's
bound
to
be
holes
and
gaps
and
I'm,
not
like
decrying.
D
The
process
I
just
in
some
cases,
do
feel
like
I'm,
not
sure
the,
and
this
is
from
getting
bounced
around
I,
like
so
I'm,
not
sure
the
right
person
to
whether
the
you
know,
who's,
responsible
or
accountable
or
like
who
I
should
be
reaching
out
to
throughout
this
process,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
that
Ummah
has
the
the
perty
of
that
project.
Has
the
opportunity
to
learn
from
how
Kudo
and
say
gap
delivering
the
TLC
all
are
together
right
that
that's
that's
my
perspective
on
that.
G
B
A
So
yesterday
there
was
supposed
to
be
the
boat
on
the
toc
of
operator
framework
being
incubated
in
two
scenes
yet
and
I
understand
that
was
actually
postponed
due
to
questions
raised
on
the
nature
of
operator
hub
being
very
tightly
coupled
to
our
framework
components
and
also
due
to
the
fact
that
there
is
a
CNC
F
hub
project
going
on
which
I've
linked
here,
but
it's
private.
So
you
can't
see
it
that
somehow
overlaps
with
this
so
I
was
wondering
if
any
any
of
you
in
those
called
know
what
this
is
about
and
I.
H
So
my
recommendation
there
is
honestly
we
would
have
to
reach
out
to
the
T
you
see,
so
we
have
done
the
recommendations
document.
This
was
a
cold
Appetit.
You
see
he
made
and
honestly
we
can
I
believe
the
only
way
we
can
help
you
simply
push
back
this
everywhere,
push
it
back
to
the
T.
You
see
I,
think
really
best
on
from
your
end,
to
bring
it
up
directly
to
the
TC.
C
Just
just
to
add
some
details
to
this
I.
Don't
think
there
was
actually
supposed
to
be
a
vote
yesterday.
They
don't
do
votes
on
the
live
calls
they
do
votes
on
the
mailing
lists,
and
so
it
happens.
Asynchronously
the
the
calls
are
an
opportunity
to
present
information
and
then
the
votes
themselves
go
out
to
the
mailing
list
and
then
you
can
have
binding
and
non-binding.
You
know
votes
on
these
things
and
then,
after
a
certain
period,
the
number
and
they've
got
enough
binding
votes
and
the
results
are
reported.
C
If
you
actually
go
to
the
mailing
list
and
search
for
results,
you
can
see
the
previous
votes
and
in
how
that
has
unfolded.
So
I,
don't
think
there
was
actually
supposed
to
be
a
vote
yesterday
on
this.
As
far
as
this
whole
hub
goes
and
linked
to
a
private
repo,
a
bunch
of
the
details
on
this
were
planed
on
being
more
public
sooner
and
that's
been
thrown
off
by
the
coronavirus.
Quite
frankly,
the
CN
CF
staff
has
basically
been
all
consumed
by
it
and
I
just
learned
about
the
announcement.
C
A
C
A
C
C
Yeah,
but
if
you
even
get
into
conversation
such
as
the
operator
hub
currently
in
its
own
implementation,
only
does
OLM,
which
gets
it
into
king-making
right,
and
so
it
is
upon
them
to
do
careful
due
diligence
to
make
sure
something
like
the
operator
hub
doesn't
do
king-making
and
to
look
at
it
in
the
broader
scope
of
everything.
That's
going
on
right,
I'm,
confused.
A
C
If
you
actually
get
into
the
I,
don't
know
if
that
the
spec
has
been
shared
with
you,
the
original
spec
for
it,
because
the
stuff
you
saw
is
still
very
early
work.
The
original
spec
actually
talks
about
not
king-making,
but
it
is
focused
on
C
and
C
F
projects,
and
so,
if
you
look
at
the
CN
CF
projects,
that's
kind
of
where
its
scope
is,
and
so
you
would
see
that
things
like
Falco,
because
Falco,
if
you
know,
if
people
don't
know,
there's
something
called
the
cloud
native
security.
H
C
And
I'm
surprised
this
was
here
because
Dan
had
asked
everybody
to
be
patient
for
a
few
days
and
wait
so
this
could
all
be
handled,
and
it
was
brought
up
for
conversation
here
outside
of
that
request
to
wait
a
few
days,
and
so
we
should
probably
wait
for
that
to
happen
and
by
our
next
meeting
here
at
se
gap.
Delivery
I
would
expect
the
details
to
be
much
more
public
and
aware
for
us
to
have
a
fully
scoped
conversation,
and
so
I'm
surprised.
C
This
was
even
on
here
given
that
and
that
it's
the
toc
who
wants
to
have
the
conversation
with
the
operator
framework
and
I,
don't
even
know
the
in
their
meeting.
They
said
they
were
waiting
on
something
from
Dan
and
Dan
has
been
waiting
for
these
things,
and
so
they
were
just
asking
everybody
to
be
patient
right
now.
Well,
this
gets
worked
out
through
the
coronavirus
problems,
and
so
that.
A
C
A
C
This
is
the
problem
Dan's
time
in
order
to
be
able
to
address
this,
and
everything
else
he
needs
to
address
is
the
issue
that
was
asking
people
to
be
patient,
because
they've
been
very
busy
trying
to
figure
out
they
had
to
move.
They
just
announced
moving
the
conference
and
the
logistics
around.
That
is
a
very
big.
C
A
I
can
totally
understand
that,
like
yeah,
you
know
totally
understand
that
particular
context.
It's
just
that
why
it's
just
holding
up
the
both.
Why
just
why
just
did.
Why
did
it
not
come
up
earlier
right,
like
in
the
past
months,
we've
been
trying
to
like
to
sort
all
of
this
out
and
now
all
the
sudden
like
in
the
end,
that's
a
bit
of
surprise
for
us
in
here
which
says:
oh
actually,
there's
another
thing,
and
you
know
you're
colliding
with
that,
so
that
just
makes
it
feel
very
we're
toast.
C
So
I
I
would
suggest
that,
since
the
TOC
is
the
one
who's
had
the
recommendation
to
them,
the
TOC
is
now
the
one
who
is
holding
this
up
on
other
things.
We
probably
can't
solve
that
in
say,
gap
delivery
because
we
don't
know
what's
going
on
in
the
TOC.
This
is
a
conversation
appropriate
for
the
TOC.
D
I
C
C
Homes
bit
different
right
because
the
helm
hub
is
a
search
registry
for
just
helm
packages.
The
operator
hub
is
for
all
things,
all
operators,
it's
not
the
OLM
hub,
it's
the
operator
hub
and
right
now
it
is
only
willing
to
do
things
from
the
OLM
perspective
and
I
understand
there
have
been
promises
in
the
next
agenda
item
is
to
deal
with
things
that
are
other
than
OLM,
but
all
of
these
things
and
future
plans
have
to
be
accounted
for
right.
C
So
when
it
comes
to
things
like
the
helm
hub
and
the
ciencia
hub
and
all
of
the
relations
to
these
things,
that
plan
is
already
in
place.
Now,
requests
have
mid
made
on
the
actual
issue
for
the
operator
hub
coming
and
how
it
would
relate
to
those
things
and
no
agreements
or
anything
have
been
made
or
discussed
which
may
go
along
with
the
way
it's
being
evaluated.
But
I
can't
really
say
right
now.
C
It's
all
just
speculation
by
right,
dig
into
that,
and
if
folks
want
to
grab
me
offline,
I'm
happy
to
dig
in
a
little
bit
further
I,
just
don't
want
to
announce
anything
in
a
publicly
reported
recorded.
Call
that
would
be
speaking
out
of
turn,
and
so
we
should
wait
for
it,
which
just
was
all
a
bit
more
open.
A
And
you
know
wider
communicators
who
can
actually
be
anticipated,
but
we've,
like
you
know,
talked
about
it
in
the
last
call
that
operator
how
technically
would
allow?
How
charts
it's
just
not
a
very
good
UX
today
and
we
would
have
to
manually
like
overcome
some
checks
that
are
in
there.
But
you
know
it
would
totally
work.
So
that's
I
think
not
the
issue.
A
I
think
what
we
wanted
to
do
is
actually
make
the
experience
much
better,
which
is
what
the
next
agenda
items
about,
which
you
can
totally
talk
about
here,
but
I
just
want
to
reiterate
right.
I
thought
like
this:
let's
all
didn't
figure
it
out
and
now
again
suddenly
it's
a
problem
and
because
of
something
that
isn't
like
shared
or
like
developed
in
the
open
source
way,
it's
a
bit
frustrating
in
conjunction
with
the
riddles
of
how
to
actually
get
through
incubation
and
graduation
that
dude
it
to
earlier
as
well.
Certainly.
C
And
I
would
suggest
taking
this
to
the
TOC,
be
patient
at
any
hub
discussions
and
take
care
questions
to
the
TOC
and
look
for
their
specific
guidance
and
questions
and
responding
to
their
stuff,
because
that
may
provide
you
a
road
to
unblock.
But
I
don't
know
if
this
is
a
TOC
thing
on
your
issue.
Liz
was
the
one
who
commented
so
it
might
be
worth
working
with
Liz
on
this,
because
she's
the
one
who's
provided
feedback
on
this.
F
F
B
A
A
To
reiterate
is
that
one
thing
we
could
do
like
totally
tomorrow
almost
is
and
basically
allow
you
to
just
send
a
sound
chart
and
commit
it
to
the
github
repo,
and
that
will
didn't
just
pop
up
on
the
side
and
like
that's
that's
something
that
we
can
do.
There
is
very
low
bar
to
this.
The
other
thing
that
I
was
thinking
might
be
were
quite
having
it's
like
the
discussion
around
the
set
of
metadata
that
we
want
to
that.
A
We
want
to
standardize
on
for
operators
in
general,
not
just
operator
Harper,
just
operators
being
put
on
a
kind
of
catalog
and
those
just
helm
and
all
I'm
afraid.
That's
what
also
stuff
that
has
been
templated
and
packaged
with
customized
right.
So
that
was
something
I
proposed
on
the
particular
issue
that
was
raised
where
you
met
on
the
operator,
Hapai
Oh
heaps
of
people
I
was
running
it.
A
If
there's
at
all
interest
in
like
doing
that,
discussion
and
saying,
let's
figure
out
what
is
the
common
denominator
in
terms
of
metadata
for
operators
or
if
you
should
just
do
like
the
low
hanging
bar
below
in
crude
and
say,
here's
like
a
quick
hacked
actually
allow
how
you
just
start
to
be
contributed
to
the
github
repository
that
backs
operator.
Half
that
I
own.
So.
D
So
cheer
like
just
just
want
to
throw
it
like
we.
Oh
we're,
also
kicking
off
the
operator
working
group,
which
I
think
is
also
the
next
agenda
item,
and
I
think
we
should
try
to
solve
that
in
in
in
that
area
of
what's
important
to
deploy
and
operator.
Potentially,
maybe
maybe
that
should
be
a
goal
there
may
be.
Maybe
it
shouldn't,
but
III
think
we
we
should
try
to
solve
this
from.
H
So
maybe
because
we
only
have
like
couple
minutes
left,
there
is
a
big
massive
into
interest
in
the
operated
working
group
thanks.
Everybody
also
for
your
feedback.
So
far,
all
set
for
organizations
in
their
next
step
is
now
on.
Ask
some
people
already
asked
to
set
up
at
first
meeting
where
we
all
get
together
go
after
this,
so
that
we
get
it
into
a
state
where
we
can
also
push
it
forward
after
that,
you
see
about
it
and
then
obviously
also
get
into
working
mode.
H
So
that's
ongoing
expect
details
and
the
meeting
invite
in
well
early.
Actually
next,
we
came
out
the
next
two
days,
but
I
think
when
it
could
stay
there
and
I'll,
let
you
know
most
of
the
command
should
be
handled
as
well,
and
if
you
compare
it
all
is
what
we
did
regarding
air-gapped
environment
I.
Think
the
key
finding
is,
if
you
find
like
the
most
important
first
item
to
work
on
I
think
will
be
the
key,
the
key
topic
for
us.
A
C
D
So
I
guess
if
I'm
missing
something
with
with
what
we
want
to
cover
in
that
working
group
I'd
like
to
know
so
that
I'm,
not
I,
don't
want
to
be
just
like
sitting
here.
As
a
blocker
saying,
like
we
shouldn't,
add
these
things
in
scope,
because
it's
a
working
group
so
I
would
I
would
appreciate
some
guidance
there
on
what
we're
being
asked
to
solve
and
what
we're
not
being
asked
to
be.
What
we're
not
asked
to
solve
here.
H
Yeah
and
that
that
makes
sense
again
I'll
get
something
on
the
calendar
in
next
week,
so
that
we
can
have
more
as
an
initial
kick
of
meeting
and
go
through
those
points.
Many
of
you
are
already
discussed
in
the
dark,
and
some
of
my
feedback
was
just
do
like
excluding
certain
things
in
there.
This
was
more
really
related
to
about
the
air
gap
like
air,
get
the
operators
that
discussion
in
there
yeah.
Obviously,
you
don't
like
massively
focus
on
air
gap
operators,
but
the
topic
might
come
up
there.
H
A
H
Want
to
create
new
approaches,
we
don't
want
to
do
this,
but
if
the
discussion
comes
up
about
okay,
how
would
do-
and
they
also
comes
back
from
the
aircraft
working
group?
How
does
your
operator
work
in
a
in
an
aircraft
environment
that
there
might
be
some
collaboration
coming
out
of
it,
so
I'm
keeping
these
things?
It
might
just
come
out
out
there.
It's
also
paper
up
the
example:
security.
Obvious
security
is
not
the
key,
there's
definite
security,
the
dedicated
security
sig,
but
still,
if
your
security
related
in
discussions,
we
might
still
decide.
A
H
We
want
to
add
it
is
something
to
work
on
potentially
wisdom.
So
for
me,
the
non
goals
are
just
okay.
This
is
something
we
very
very
explicitly
don't
want
to
do,
and
some
of
the
other
ones
where
I
was
commanding
on
it's.
Okay,
it's
not
really
a
goal.
It's
not
really
a
priority,
but
if
the
discussion
at
some
point
makes
Sens,
you
might
want
to
have
it.
So
that's
what.
D
H
C
For
what
it's
worth
the
whole
idea
of
some
kind
of
document
or
spec
for
exposing
the
information
about
an
operator
right,
the
SIG's
fall
under
the
team
working
groups
all
fall
under
the
TOC
and
in
their
Charter
one
of
the
things
as
aligning
interfaces
to
components
under
management
code.
Reference
implementations
things
like
that
right,
and
so
that
kind
of
thing
is
an
interface
that
could
be
defined.
C
That
multiple
groups
could
do
actually
falls
in
with
in
the
scope
of
the
TOC,
so
I
mean
their
big
thing
is,
is
managing
projects
and
some
practices
you've
got
to
do
like
following
codes
of
conduct,
but
one
of
the
things
is
aligning.
Interfaces
across
projects
is
an
area
that
the
TOC
can
get
into
and
that's
where
we
fall
so
that
that
particular
piece
is
totally
within
scope.
Okay,.