Cloud Native Computing Foundation Service Mesh Interface, 8 Jul 2020

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: CNCF Service Mesh Interface Meeting 2020-07-08

Description

CNCF Service Mesh Interface Meeting 2020-07-08

A

All right- and we are like regular welcome to the July 8 meeting SMI community meeting. We have a couple of folks here. Please add yourself to the meeting notes, so we know who has been around and yeah thanks for scribing Bridgette and let's jump into the agenda.

A

First item is blog posts that you Bridget did you want to it.

B

It is yes, um I finally wrote the minimal amount of documentation necessary so that people can submit their blog posts. I know the fine folks at solo and a few other folks are interested in writing and I. Think maybe Tom and a few others are interested in writing a blog post for the SMI website. So the information you need is right there and if you want to submit them, we will hopefully get them reviewed and get them out and just build a momentum of people's exciting work that they're doing using SMI on their projects.

A

Cool any questions that does anyone want to call have a question: everything, clear, cool and except coordinate the SDK release. That's I added.

B

His name because we were discussing it on the slack, but he isn't able to be on the call today, but what I wanted to do is make sure anyone who wanted to review- and perhaps you know you know add to that particular github issue. Basically Stephane sees that as the one blocker and I think probably Thomas Michelle and a few others have opinions about this I see Michelle is on the call. If Michelle wants to tell us what she thinks. Hey.

C

Yeah um so I'm gonna review this pull request today, so we can get a release out this pull request, though its traffic target ads traffic target meet, went off I, don't know that it bumps us from bumps us with to get the latest changes on b1 alpha 3 I need to double-check on that. So once we've reviewed, we can go ahead and cut that release. I think we need two people interviews. So if somebody else is interested so.

A

You think we were not yet through it. We're still like. We need to unblock that right. We need yeah.

C

That's the big yeah, that's a big blocker. We need people review. Oh, it looks like we need one approving review to merge the pull request. First of all, we should also change that to two, but if it's just one then I can do it.

A

Do we have anyone on the call I.

C

Can ask Thomas offline, he might be good.

C

D

She could do that. Awesome, hey Michele, I might just create an issue for the 0.4 release and tag that PR as a as a as Odette. Our dependency say.

E

It would that be worth.

D

It okay I'll, do that no I'll fix the approvers.

C

Yeah, so did we also kind of release of the spec I put out for do? We need to do that. I.

D

Think we did hang on. I will check okay.

C

Not that they need to be coordinated, but it'd be really nice to like make sure that the spec that there is a release of this solid release of the spec, that's clearly defined, and then the SDK can like make sure that we're at that matching version, or we support that particular version. We can point to it. So let's do two things today.

C

One I'll definitely go ahead and work with you on key to like make sure that the spec version is where we're at, and we have the right release, tagged for that and then I'll also review Stefan's PR. So we can make sure we kind of and point to the right version of this back.

D

Okay, I will add that all to the issue looks like at zero Dalton 4.0, WD yeah.

C

So, let's, let's tiger release of the spec first and then we'll cut the release of SDK. Okay.

A

Cool any other question or comment regarding that thanks a lot for helping out there like much appreciate it. Oh.

A

Doesn't seem to be the case then more like an FYI, unless someone feels like want to discuss something you might have seen the news a couple of hours ago that sto found at home there's a new foundation called abusive comments, believe, and it looks like he still is part of that, together with two other projects. I have not yet fully understood the implications. What it means in terms of you know, relation like I'm unsure. If, if that is a linux foundation, foundation, I think it.

E

Is it is not it.

A

Is not okay, thanks for.

E

Ya highest Josh sure.

E

Yeah, it's not it's not Linux Foundation, it's an independent foundation run by Google staff and some researchers at this point, and apparently all it does- is trademark licensing. So it is probably not a substantial change to how sto the project is run.

A

A

And does anyone think that, in terms of you know the cooperation or integration or whatever office you in SMI, that anything on a technical level, operational changes or the.

B

Only thing that I can think of, as we currently had not put the sto logo on anything and if logo governance is different. Now we should maybe look into that, because if the open source nature of this foundation means that the logo can be used in this usage, then perhaps it's fine, but that I don't I'm, not I am NOT a lawyer he's a lawyer. Maybe a me can look into it. I.

E

A

A me right: that's what I think.

E

You have to wait for them to get their stuff together, because they totally have I mean, like the point of their organization, is trademark licensing. But that said, they don't actually have a procedure for trademark licensing set up yet so you're probably gonna have to actually wait for them to publish something that says, submit your request here, see chat.

D

Yeah, it says we just need to look at the. There are no immediate changes to the sto usage guidelines and the open usage Commons will respect existing sto trademark licenses and permission to use the sto name. So we which.

B

We don't abuse it, so maybe it changes nothing. That's really. The only thing I could think of I will put this that you put it from the FAQ in the notes. Lackey I'm, just being as thorough as I can I, don't think, there's anything else that affects us. Is there anything else? Anyone else sees that might affect this project.

F

Yeah I think it's I'm positive for the project.

F

E

F

For SMI I mean I'm, sorry.

G

I interpreted it that way.

G

A

Next on the agenda is welcome, John to the SMI Committee Michelle.

C

Hey yeah John is on my team, so John, if you want to introduce yourself, feel free John is working on metrics related things, and it's hopefully going to make the SMI metrics part of this book a little bit better and a little bit more up-to-date so feel free to enjoy yourself John. All.

H

Right, hi, everyone, my name is John Hyun I, just joined Microsoft a little over a month ago, working on SMI so excited to keep going.

A

Nice welcome John. Welcome, welcome aboard great to have you all right, I think that was it. That was at least what I see on the agenda. So the door is or the floor, not the door. The floor is open, any other business, any other items. Anything you want to race.

A

Doesn't seem to be the case going once going twice looks like a short meeting today, Bridget right thanks a lot everyone and we meet in two weeks time again. Thank.

C

You ex folks I.

A