►
From YouTube: CNCF TOC Meeting 2023-02-21
Description
TOC Public Meeting Working notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jpoKT12jf2jTf-2EJSAl4iTdA7Aoj_uiI19qIaECNFc/edit#heading=h.aea6ay307dzv
C
B
Right,
so
there
is
an
open
issue
on
the
repo
961
around
getting
more
sustainable
contributions,
both
within
the
tags,
as
well
as
back
to
projects
within
the
community
and
understanding
a
little
bit
more
around
the
handoff
and
the
health
between
the
talk
and
the
tags,
as
well
as
the
work
that's
being
requested
of
the
tags
in
response
to
Toc
activities,
whether
or
not
that
sandbox
considerations,
if
it's
incubation
due
diligence,
graduation
and
even
potentially
post
graduation
associated
with
projects.
B
We
had
one
of
these
meetings
back
in
October
of
2022
to
start
having
some
of
these
discussion
items
for
a
quick
refresher
on
that
we
did
talk
about
talk
and
tag
engagement
on
projects.
B
We
also
talked
about
the
need
for
better
onboarding
of
new
tags
and
some
of
the
existing
challenges
we've
experienced
transitioning
between
working
groups
and
tags
and
when
to
make
a
decision
between
those
also
as
well
discussing
whether
or
not
the
existing
charters
of
the
tags
are
still
serving
the
needs
of
the
community
or
whether
or
not
there's
potentially,
some
constraints
associated
with
making
progress
in
those
areas.
B
We've
also
talked
about
succession
planning
and
potential
co-chair
rotation
to
avoid
as
much
burnout
as
possible
burnout
as
possible,
as
well
as
decrease
the
eliminate
potentially
the
bus
factor
from
our
community,
as
well
as
driving
more
participation
from
Members
having
a
higher
level
of
activity
within
the
existing
tags
and
making
sure
that
our
tags
are
empowered
to
set
and
achieve
their
goals,
objectives
and
whatever
deliverables
they
in
their
communities
desire.
As
long
as
it's
within
the
alignment
of
the
group,
okay,
961.
B
That
is
a
recommendation
for
us
to
try
to
get
more
sustainability,
both
within
the
sandbox,
as
well
as
project
maturity
and
help
guide
some
of
these
projects,
so
we're
not
hitting
the
larger
Gates
within
the
community,
such
as
incubation
due
diligence
and
projects,
are
going
back
to
tags
all
at
once
with
a
large
amount
of
requests
for
assistance
and
support
and
the
tags
simply
do
not
have
the
volunteer
resources
or
the
members
that
are
able
to
commit
to
the
timeline
that
projects
are
actually
looking
for.
B
B
I'm
going
to
take
a
step
back
because
I'm
not
getting
a
lot
of
responses
from
anyone.
What
can
we
do
to
help
facilitate
some
of
the
discussion
around
both
the
this
particular
issue?
961
and
the
corresponding
PR
or
any
of
the
other
items?
I
called
out
previously
for
today's
meeting.
D
Emily
I
just
joined
and
I
probably
missed
context,
I
apologize,
but
one
thing
that
does
having
read
the
issue.
One
thing:
that's
that
I'm
ignorant
of
and
maybe
has
been
done,
is
there
an
initial
draft
for
like,
like
the
issue,
describes
the
topic
and
and
kind
of
calls
out
into
question.
It
asks
some
great
questions,
but
is
there
a
draft
of
a
proposal
or
for.
B
The
pr
yeah
yeah
so
for
the
defining
sandbox
exit
criteria,
potentially
creating
Milestones
to
incubation,
that
is
in
PR
number
997.
So
the
that
PR
includes
an
outline
of
what
sandbox,
archival
actually
looks
like,
potentially
from
a
Toc
perspective
based
off
of
what
we've
seen
in
some
of
these
projects.
D
E
B
F
F
G
E
G
B
The
intent
behind
the
the
cloud
native
Milestones
PR
is
to
resolve
issue
961..
It
breaks
it
up
into
two
primary
areas.
One
is
defining
the
criteria
by
which
the
TOC
can
evaluate
sandbox
projects
for
archive.
We
already
have
an
archive
process
in
place
within
the
foundation.
However,
we've
not
been
applying
it
to
sandbox
projects
as
part
of
an
annual
review
to
understand
the
progress
that
they're
making.
B
So
this
is
more
formally
provide
some
guidelines
for
the
TOC
when
evaluating
those
projects,
because
sandbox
is
originally
designed
to
be
more
of
a
experimental
area
to
figure
out
whether
or
not
this
is
a
community
growth
opportunity
or
if
this
is
an
emerging
technology.
Space
will
will
it
be
successfully
adopted
by
our
end
users
and
adopters
within
the
community,
and
this
will
allow
us
to
kind
of
Clean
Up,
the
Sandbox
for
projects
that
have
languished
for
an
extended
period
of
time
and
we're
not
seeing
any
progress.
B
B
So
that's
the
first
portion
of
the
pr
the
second
portion
of
the
pr
is
to
Define
Milestones
as
guiding
points
for
projects
to
achieve
a
higher
level
of
maturity.
Moving
throughout
this
encf
life
cycle.
This
is
moving
from
sandbox
to
incubation,
to
graduation
and
then
sustaining
a
higher
level
of
maturity
beyond
graduation
Milestones
are
not
intended
to
replace
any
of
the
graduation
requirements.
They
are
there
to
serve
as
guiding
points.
Not
all
projects
will
feel
the
need
to
achieve
any
of
the
Milestones
or
even
some
of
them.
B
G
Much
some
set
up,
okay,
yeah
and
I
think
the
idea
here
is
just
this
is
not
a
like.
Some
process
then
needs
to
be
followed,
but
it's
more
like
guidance.
Correct,
like
some
projects,
might
find
some
things
better
or
could
be
successful
at
some
things
where
other
projects
can't
right,
but
but
they're
not,
but
they
can
achieve
their
requirements
in
different
ways.
H
Yeah
so
I'm
thinking
for
the
sort
of
the
two
parts
right
for
the
archiving
of
the
sandbox
projects.
H
Have
we
sent
the
email
specifically
specifically
to
those
sandbox
project,
maintainers
ask
their
feedback,
because
that
may
you
know
impact
their.
You
know
their
work,
so
maybe
they
want.
They
didn't
know
this.
They
are
not
aware
of
this,
so
they
can
catch
up.
If
they
want
to,
you
know,
keep
that
sandbox.
You
know
healthy
status,
I
think
that
would
be
helpful
rather
than
later
on.
You
know.
When
we
started
archive
you
know
somebody's
party,
they
will
be
surprised.
B
So
the
existing
archive
process
does
kind
of
describe
that
a
little
bit
from
nominating
via
the
via
an
issue
as
well
as
contacting
the
maintainers
of
the
project.
However,
sandbox
projects
do
have
an
annual
review
that
they
submit
to
the
TOC
each
year
that
we
follow
up
with
them
on.
H
Yeah
yeah:
that's
because
I
understand
that
part
I'm
thinking
you
know
if
this
would
put
this
emerges,
PR
right,
I
think
probably
it's
good.
We
asked
for
their
input
or
their
feedback
on
this.
C
Right
we
do,
but
the
problem
is:
there's
gonna
be
like
a
thousand
of
them,
so
I
think
I
would
limit
down
the
the
level
of
a
request
that
I
think
I
would
put
in.
H
C
B
We
can
certainly
call
that
out
when
we
push
this
for
the
two-week
public
comment,
but
we
wanted
to
socialize
this
with
the
tags
first
for
their
feedback.
E
I
J
They'll
be
usually
like
there,
yet
they're,
not
even
leveraging
the
community
or
in
the
engagement
model
with
the
text
that
much,
but
we
have
auto
tech
leads
here
as
well.
Maybe
their
experience
is
different.
Yeah.
D
For
a
tag
Network
characterized
it
precisely
or
that's
our
same
experience
as
well.
G
Yeah
I
think
for
tag
or
in
time
we
reach
out
to
a
lot
of
the
projects
that
have
actually
applied
for
sandbox.
Like
the
we
look
at,
we
used
to
look
at
the
spreadsheet,
but
I
think
the
spreadsheet
is
there's
some
other
place
where
we
can
see
the
sandbox
projects
and
we
reach
out
to
them
and
ask
them
whether
they
want
to
present
in
our
meeting.
So
that's
how
we
engage
them,
but
typically
we
engage
them
just
once.
G
Maybe
at
least
like
once
a
year,
the
most
Sometimes
some
of
the
projects
come
back,
but
typically
that's
like
when
they
want
to
go
to
like
a
different
level
like
incubation
or
graduation
I.
Think
there's
so
many
sandbox
projects
now
that
it's
kind
of
hard
to
keep
track.
G
Maybe
it
might
be
good
to
have
some
sort
of
invest
in
some
sort
of
automation
that,
for
example,
like
for
the
annual
reviews,
instead
of
like
manually
sending
you
know,
requests
from
panel
reviews
I'm
not
really
sure
if
they're,
actually,
the
projects
are
keeping
track
of
this,
but
I
mean
I.
Think
from
the
cncf
point
at
point
of
view
that
it
will
be
good
to
have
some
sort
of
automation
that
reminds
them
that
maybe
the
project
is
due
for
any
overview
or
maybe
to
remind
them
that
it
might
be
good
to
engage
the
tax.
C
C
So,
like
yeah
you're,
you're
you're
slightly
ahead
of
me
and
also
like
I'm
slightly
ahead
of
you
so
but
yeah.
That
is
something
we're
thinking
about.
A
I
have
a
few
things
to
add
as
well.
One
it'd
be
interesting.
We
could
probably
to
document
in
the
archiving
process.
Is
there
a
measure?
Is
there
a
mechanism
I
wish
they
can
find
their
way
back
out
of
it
or,
if
that's
like
the
archival
is
the
you
know
like
what
is
the
is
that
the
end
of
the
line
for
that
project,
or
is
there
a
way
for
them
to
find
their
way
back
into
this
when
they
resubmit
like?
A
How
would
they,
if
the
Project
Sparks
new
life,
you
know
like
what
happens
next
and
then
the
the
second
point
is
I,
see
a
lot
of
reaching
out
to
different
groups,
but
I
wonder
if
there's
also
a
way
either
for
different
tags
to
create
Milestones
that
make
sense
specifically
for
them
and
then
to
pull
them
in
in
that
way
right.
So
that
like
if
this
is
a
storage
project,
that
type
of
storage
would
have
particular
Milestones.
That
might
make
sense
for
a
storage
project
because
clearly,
like
the
tag,
security
does
have
Milestones.
A
That
do
make
sense
for
the
security
kind
of
thing
and
I'm
wondering
if
there
are
other
tags
that
have
things
that
would
fall
within
a
particular
vertical
repair
that
they
represent,
that
they
want
to
include
in
miles.
C
So
Duffy
to
your
first
point,
I've
answered
that
in
chat
it's
already
listed
over
in,
like
the
archiving
like
process
as
well
and
any
project,
that's
an
archive
can
come
back
and
reapply
if
they're
active
again
just
normal
process
proposal
I'll,
let
the
tag
Focus
kind
of
speak
towards,
like
other
Milestones
or
Emily,
can
think
about
that
as
well,
but
the
first
one,
that's
already
covered
we're
good
on
that.
C
One
neat
I
know
we
have
Dawn
on
the
line
and
tag
contributor
strategy
seems
like
the
one
that
would
also
have
like
Milestones
directly
yeah.
K
I
was
about
I
was
about
to
chime
in
thanks,
Amy
yeah,
so
I
think
I.
Think
today,
contributor
strategy
also
has
some
Milestones,
so
we'd
probably
want
to
add
in
particular
around
things
like,
like
governance
and
contributor
ladders
and
and
some
of
the
the
things
that
we
would
like
projects
to
have
in
place
and
I
think
I.
K
Think
having
some
of
this
in
the
Milestones
will
help
people
start
thinking
about
it
before
they
get
to
graduated,
because
that's
that's
pretty
late
to
be
formalizing
the
governance
model,
which
is
I,
think
where
we,
where
we
have
it
now.
So
we
can.
We
can
take
this
back
to
take
contributor
strategy
and
talk
about
what
we
might
need
from
a
milestone
perspective,
but
yeah
I
think
that's
a
really
good
point.
B
So
it
sounds
like
there's
a
fair
amount
of
agreement
from
the
tag
leadership
around
development,
of
some
form
of
milestones
for
each
of
their
domain
areas.
Would
you
all
agree.
B
Okay.
So
what
I'll
propose?
Is
that
we'll
let
this
sit
with
the
tags?
Probably
for
about
a
month,
because
I
know
everyone
has
different
meeting
times
and
whether
or
not
you
all
would
like
to
have
your
Milestones
within
the
repo
comment
them
on
the
pr
or
extract
some
of
the
Milestones
on
the
pr
into
those
within
your
repo.
B
L
Hey
sorry,
I
joined
late,
so
regarding
the
Milestones.
Is
this
something
that
each
tag
will
be
responsible
for
defining
what
other
milestones.
B
L
B
Okay,
any
other
comments,
suggestions
on
this
topic.
Ricardo,
you
came
off
mute.
G
I
mean
there
might
be
a
few
things
here
and
there
that
are
unique
to
each
tag,
but
in
general
you
know,
I,
basically,
I,
don't
see
how,
for
example,
tag
runtime
will
be
very
different
from
like
a
general
Milestone,
like
maybe
something
related
to
runtime
projects
that
slower
or
faster,
but
but
in
general
I
think
they
will
be
pretty
similar
and
I
think
it
would
be
great
for
all
each
one
of
the
attacks
to
chime
in.
But
you
know
just
that's
just
my
my
take
on
that.
J
Yeah
I
think
one
of
the
easiest
questions
to
the
sandbox
projects
might
actually
be
if
they
stay
in
sandbox
for
quite
a
while
and
did
not
apply
for
incubation,
what's
actually
holding
them
back
and
which
criteria
they're
missing
and
how
they're
trying
to
achieve
this.
So
this
would
be
one
way
to
actually
track
progress
as
well,
because
there
are
well-defined
criteria
for
moving
from
sandbox
to
incubation,
and
this
would
help
to
identify
only
one
hand,
problems
and,
on
the
other
hand,
does
the
pro.
J
Does
the
project
have
an
idea
on
how
to
reach
this
so,
whether
it's
more
in
the
governance
side,
it's
more
on
the
adoption
side
and
then
like
regular
review.
This
may
be
together
with
with
the
tech,
not
review
in
a
sense
that
we
tell
them.
Okay,
you
did
this
wrong,
but
I.
Don't
really
have
a
discussion,
obviously
ask
them
to
work
closely
with
tech
contributor
strategy,
and
that
has
to
resolve
those
issues.
J
But
this
would
also
help
like
almost
allow
the
roadmap
how
they
want
to
move
in
a
certain
direction,
because
we
assume
I
think
that
projects
eventually
want
to
move
from
sandbox
to
incubation
and
I
think
they
should
kind
of
have
a
roadmap
for
this.
So
this
might
be
helpful
and
put
the
apply
across
all
tags
and
all
projects
pretty
much.
B
Agreed,
that's
certainly
something
we
can
look
at,
at
least
as
part
of
the
annual
review
with
some
of
those
sandbox
projects.
Amy.
Do
you
recall
if
we
have
a
similar
question
like
that,
on
the
existing
annual
review
form
for
projects
around
what
they
feel
is
holding
them
back
from
seeking
incubation?
It's.
C
Not
what's
holding
you
back,
it's
are
you
ready?
Do
you
feel
the
project
is
ready
for
incubation?
It's
not
like.
What's
holding
you
back
and
like
sometimes
like
the,
we
will
sometimes
get
answers
that
say
like
yeah,
we
need
more
adoption,
or
no
we're
not
quite
there
yet
or
like
something
like
they'll,
be
pretty
direct
about
where
the
project
is,
but
it's
usually
never
like
the
this
is
holding
us
back,
and
this
is
something
that
we
need
more
help
with.
C
One
of
the
things
we
do
do
is
like
the
annual
reviews.
Complete
is
send
out
a
note
from
Tech
contributor
strategy,
which
is
basically
like
inviting
them
to
like
hey
you've
gotten
through
your
annual
review,
come
on
by
and
and
that
I
think
has
worked
fairly
well
for
that
particular
tag.
I
C
So
they're
always
over
on
the
TOC
repo,
always
but
they're
actually
linked
now
for
like,
if,
if
we
had
some
of
them
that
were
out
there
they're
now
over
in
the
landscape
data
as
well,
and
we're
working
with
the
landscape
team
to
be
able
to
kind
of
expose
that
more
in
the
the
landscape
cards,
because
there
there
is
in
fact
a
lot
in
the
repo
it
happens.
B
Okay,
so
the
next
topic
that
we
have
on
the
agenda
is
around
new
tag.
Onboarding.
We
recently
had
the
environmental
sustainability
sustainability
tag
join
us.
B
What
recommendations
do
the
existing
tags
have
on
ensuring
the
next
one
is
a
higher
likelihood
of
success,
both
in
attracting
contributors
or
developing
and
setting
standards
on
their
own
governance,
meeting
Cadence
kind
of
execution
of
their
Charter
and
and
goals
and
objectives
of
those
groups?
Foreign.
B
Don't
know
that
we've
taken
the
time
to
actually
write
them
down
and
I
know
that
I
personally
have
not
had
the
time
to
meet
with
any
of
the
existing
co-chairs
of
the
new
tags
to
understand
how
we
could
have
been
more
supportive
with
them
and
I.
G
Maybe
around
sign
into
documentation
how
to
elect
tag,
chairs
and
tag
tech
leads
I.
Think
maybe
the
could
be
a
challenge
right
like
I
know
that
stuff
is
in
the
TOC
repo,
but
maybe
some
folks
might
have
actually
had
a
hard
time
finding
it
but
yeah.
So
that's
that's
one
aspect
of
maybe
improving
documentation
or
way
to
find
documentation
on
how
to
onboard
attack
or
how
to
maintain
the
tag
chairs
or
actually
find
new
tag.
G
K
And
I
think
a
lot
of
the
tags
struggle
with
the
same
things
that
the
open
source
project
struggle
with
right.
It's
it
can
be
hard
to
find
people
who
are
passionate
about
some
of
this
some
of
these
topics.
This
is
something
that
Josh,
Burkes
and
I
have
talked
about
quite
a
bit
because,
let's
face
it,
there
aren't
a
lot
of
people
who
are
as
passionate
about
open
source
project
governance
as
as
Josh
and
I
are,
and
so
you
know
we're
thinking
a
lot
about
how
do
we?
K
K
I
wish
I
had
great
solutions
for
that,
but
it's
one
of
those
things
that
that
kind
of
takes
time,
and
so
maybe
maybe
helping
set
expectations
that
this
is
kind
of
like
spinning
up
a
new
open
source
project,
and
it
can
sometimes
take
time
to
find
the
right
people
get.
The
right
meeting,
Cadence
get
you
know
things
sort
of
working,
the
way
that
you
might
want
them
to
work,
because
that's
it's
just
not
going
to
be
there
on
day
one
so
maybe
maybe
setting
expectations
would
help
a
bit.
G
J
A
J
Yeah
I
think
from
tax.
What
what
we
kind
of
learned,
we
were
successful
on
topics
that
a
lot
of
people
cared
about
and
had
immediate
value
from
and
I
think
that's
what
was
kind
of
helpful
and
very
often,
and
that
I
talked
to
other
newer
tags
as
well.
People
like
to
start
out.
We
built
this
landscape.
J
We
built
this
a
white
paper
which
is
very
often
something
that
people
lose
interest,
rather
quickly
they're
kind
of
excited
in
the
beginning,
but
it
doesn't
really
solve
a
problem
for
them
or
it's
not
like
at
their
immediate
concern
like
in
some
cases
who
do
you
get
to
write
a
white
paper?
Usually
vendors
and
projects
who
want
to
have
their
view
represented
there.
Very
often
you
get
people
and
read
the
white
people
who
the
white
people
who
obviously
want
to
work
on
it.
A
landscape
is
what
you
see.
J
Actually,
a
lot
of
the
tech
goals
is
something
that
might
be
useful
for
some
again
it's
for
a
lot
of
people
in
marketing
tool,
but
when
it
actually
starts
to
find
the
real
problem
where
you
get
people
involved
and
a
lot
of
people
passionate
enough
to
run
it
because,
even
as
the
coach
here,
you
can't
like
run
all
the
work
within
the
working
group.
J
J
Everybody
was
like
excited
about
the
operator
white
paper,
which
is
still
used
a
lot
that
was
actually
white
paper.
That
worked.
Why?
Because
a
lot
of
people
didn't
know
how
to
like
properly
handle
and
write
them.
That
was
good.
There
was
another
one
about
the
air
gapped
environments.
There
was
a
little
bit
of
interest
that
immediately
went
away
and
I
think
you
have
to
do
a
lot
of
this
curation
for
those
topics
and
now,
with
everything
around
like
platform,
delivery
and
platform
building,
suddenly
there's
a
big
interest
again
from
people.
J
I
think
it
goes
up
and
down.
I
think
the
real
help,
and
what's
like
really
hard,
is
getting
the
word
out
about
the
work
done
within
the
tags,
whether
it's
social
media
like
like.
Even
before
we
had
the
new
platform,
it
was
easier
to
publish
videos
on
YouTube,
like
we
had
this
automatic
process
for
it,
managing
your
social
media
accounts
and
like
other
ways
of
Engagement
and
getting
content
out
there
to
get.
J
You
know
out
there
that
is
important
and
valuable
information
for
people
and
also
help
those
people
who
are
passionate
about
their
work.
I
think
that's
that's
the
biggest
challenge,
because
that
always
almost
becomes
like
a
full-time,
Community,
Management
job,
also
to
like
to
dance
Point.
Here
it's
pretty
much
like
running
an
open
source
project
where
you
constantly
have
to
build
community,
and
even
if
you
have
it
like
for
one
topic,
once
you
move
to
another
one,
you
might
lose
a
great
portion
of
that
Community
again.
J
B
Okay,
so
what
I'll
do
is
I've
been
making
some
personal
notes
and
I'm
gonna?
Take
it
back
and
think
through
how
we
can
start
setting
up
a
potential
guide
and
some
guidance
I
think
there
are
some
nuggets
of
things
in
here
that
we
probably
have
documentation
written
down
somewhere.
It
just
needs
brought
to
light
and
refreshed
to
figure
out
whether
or
not
it's
going
to
be
reusable
for
the
rest
of
the
tags
or
just
in
generally
for
for
projects.
B
I
do
think
that
getting
exposure
of
the
tags
and
the
work
that
they
do
is
probably
something
that
we
can
look
to
the
foundation
for
support
for
and
figure
out
what
consistent
methods
or
processes
we
can
put
in
place
to
enable
the
tanks
to
be
a
little
bit
more
self-service
or
at
least
provide
that
that
not
necessarily
gloved
handoff,
but
something
to
make
that
the
level
of
effort
and
doing
a
lot
of
this
exposure
and
community
building
a
little
bit
easier
or
lighter
weight
for
the
tag
chairs,
because
I
do
know
that
you
all
have
a
lot
on
your
plate
already.
C
F
C
B
Okay,
so
we
talked,
we
touched
a
little
bit
on
the
succession
planning
and
go
chair
rotation
burnout
concerns
specifically
thank
you.
Don
for
bringing
bringing
this
up
has
any
of
the
tanks
had
any
success.
In
doing
some
of
this
succession
planning
and
alleviating
members
of
their
Community
to
become
tech
leads
and
eventually,
potentially
co-chairs.
Are
you
all
experiencing
particular
challenges?
Is
it
just
lack
of
contributors
in
this
space.
G
Yeah
I
think
that's
some
setup.
Lack
of
contributors
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
people
in
the
projects,
but
also
getting
them
motivated
to
step
up
to
work
in
the
tag
right.
So
there,
a
lot
of
these
people
are
actually
in
the
projects
are
busy
with
maintaining
their
projects
that
you
know
how
does
the
how
to
help
them
get
to
that
next
steps
where
they
can
reach
out
to
other
projects
in
their
space
and
and
actually
become
part
of
the
the
tag
leadership.
E
G
Even
even
you
know,
basic
contributors
like,
for
example,
attack
runtime.
We
have
like
different
people
joining
every
meetings-
they're,
not
the
same,
so
we
don't,
we
have
like.
Maybe
we're
Nikita
has
like
been
joined
in
the
last,
maybe
two
months,
but
but
then
other
folks,
you
know,
have
joined
in
the
past.
Maybe
you
know
for
a
couple
months,
but
then
they
kind
of
drop
off,
and
so
they
don't
join
us.
G
So
they
don't
have
that
constant
amount
of
people
I
think
as
opposed
to
some
something
like
security
attack,
but
they
get
like
regulars
all
the
time.
So
it's
hard
to
kind
of
like
just
groom
people
to
to
become
a
part
of
the
tag.
Leadership
like
tech
leads
or
co-chairs.
G
G
Well,
don't
say
please
right
just
say
something
like
you
know:
tag
is
working
on
these
things
and
and
it's
exciting
and
and
come
join
the
meetings
you
know
or
send
reminders
of
the
meetings
we
actually
send
reminders
in
our
slack
channel
for
our
meetings
like
a
day
before,
maybe
you
know
blast
out
to
a
longer
to
a
wider
audience.
You
know
that
the
meeting
is
happening,
for
example,
because.
E
J
Everything
that
that's
available,
async,
Beyond,
even
meeting
notes
and
also
collaboration
opportunities
tremendously,
helps
that
that's
what
we've
seen
that's
why
sometimes
collaboration
on
documents
draws
way
more
people
in
than
the
actual
meetings
like
we
had
like
working
collaborating
on
some
topics?
There
was
very
much
involvement
async,
but
if
it
would
come
to
that
meeting,
almost
nobody
would
be
there
and
I
think
that's
a
situation
that
we're
kind
of
over
facing.
J
We
are
interested
in
those
topics,
but
we
have
to
align
them,
not
not
read
attack
chairs,
but
but
we,
the
people
being
interested
in
in
contributing
and
collaborating,
have
to
align
into
our
other
schedules
and
I.
Think
that's
that's
also.
Sometimes
the
hard
part
for
people
so
I
think
the
more
we
can
make
things
work
asynchronously,
which
is
also
obviously
for
the
tech
chairs
and
the
better
rate
gets
that's.
Why
I
think
to
some
extent,
meetings
are
not
necessarily
the
best
indicator.
B
Yeah
I
I've
heard
that
as
well
asynchronous
progress
is,
is
more
successful.
Okay,.
A
An
understanding
or
recognition
of
the
reward
for
such
a
thing
might
be
helpful
too,
like
if
we
were
to
I
know.
This
is
kind
of
a
wild
idea.
I've,
definitely
seen
a
lot
of
people
doing
things
that
I,
wouldn't
think
would
be
worth
their
time
when
there
is
like
a
badge
or
something
else
like
that.
That
allows
them
to
indicate
to
the
general
public
that
they're
doing
this
stuff.
A
So
there's
like
some
way
that
they
that
they
understand
materially,
why
this
is
valuable
to
them
right
and
it
might
just
be
hey.
You
know,
like
you're
part
of
a
community,
and
you
can
use
these
things
too,
further
your
career
path
or
whatever
like,
but
just
some
some
way
of
understanding
the
reward
system.
For
for
this
work
to
be
good,
you
know.
M
H
I
I
think
you
know
Ricardo
the
the
pattern
you
mentioned
about
the
attack
runtime.
You
know
some
like
for
some.
Some
people
join
for
period
of
time
and
then
disappear
and
then
other
other
people
join
for
another
period
of
time.
I
think
that's
a
very
common
pattern:
yeah
I'm
thinking
how
we
can
you
know
to
keep
their
have
a
way
to
you
know
to
keep
their
interests
and
have
them
join.
H
You
know
the
meetings
for
a
longer
time
and
eventually
become
the
you
know,
help
with
the
tech
lead
or
Tech
chair,
I
I'm
wondering.
Is
there
a
processing
place
for
people
to
know
how
they
can
become
Tech,
chair
or
technique,
and
Tech
chair
like,
for
example,
take
pack
run
time.
As
an
example?
Do
we
have
one
for
that.
G
Yeah
this
that's
what
we're
talking
about
here.
So
there's,
there's
just
general
documentation
on
how
tack
chairs
are
elected
and
I.
Think
Amy
chair
the
tag
transition
and
that's
there's
a
document
and
that's
the
other
one
that
is
there,
but
there's.
C
G
Yeah
but
but
I
think
you
know,
all
these
points
are
really
good
and
I
mean
the
the
reward
system
is
very
helpful
to
you
like
what
do
they
get
out
of
participating
to
so
so
people
don't
know
like
what
what
they
get
out
of
it.
So
I
I
in
you
know
for
the
program
committee
there's
also
some
monetary
reward,
but
I
don't
know
how
that's,
if
that's
possible,
but
but
but
initially
I
think
it
would
be.
G
You
know
good
to
have
the
you
know
the
the
game,
the
gains
for
from
from
actually
participating
in
the
community
right
like
yeah,
you
get
to
learn
like
some
of
the
latest
Technologies.
You
know
so
some
of
the
projects
that
are
going
to
be
used
in
the
next,
maybe
two
to
three
years:
Cutting
Edge.
You
know
all
that
type
of
good
stuff.
H
Yeah
I
think
that
that's
a
good
point
I
think
you
know
for
people
to
know
what
they
will
get
out
of
it
right
either.
The
organ
you
know
more
exposure
to
other
technology,
other
projects
and
also
if
there
is
a
clear
document
on
the
ladder
of
becoming
the
technique,
the
tech
chair
or
maybe
reach
out
to
them
and
tell
them.
You
know
yeah.
We
need
people,
you
know
to
lab
for
the
lighter,
so
they
can
have
a
goal
right
then.
H
B
Okay,
I
think
this
is
a
lot
of
really
good
feedback
on
what
we
can
do
to
potentially
incentivize
other
individuals
to
do
more,
not
necessarily
more
work
but
become
more
involved,
more
engaged
collaborate
more
with
the
tags
and
some
of
the
the
activities
that
they're
looking
to
accomplish
Kathy.
Your
particular
question
reminded
me
of
the
existing
difference
between
how
the
TOC
refill
documents
technical,
lead
and
co-chair
nominations
and
how
that
is
different
than
what
the
tags
themselves
may
look
to
in
their
leadership.
B
I
know
that
the
tax
Security
Group
spent
a
fair
amount
of
time
trying
to
document
and
refine
what
it
is
that
they
look
for
in
a
technical
lead
as
well
as
within
a
co-chair.
They
went
through
a
an
exercise
to
document.
What
does
a
proposal
look
like
within
the
tag
for
someone
to
come
into
that?
It's
allowed
them
to
do
rotations.
It's
allowed
them
to
build
up
their
technical
leadership
team.
This
may
not
work
for
all
tags,
but
potentially
including
some
information
within
the
repo
associated
with
the
tags
and
I.
B
Don't
know
if
everyone
has
this
from
what
they
are
looking
for
in
technical
leads
or
what
are
their
technical
leads
in
body
to
become
eligible
for
our
nomination,
whether
or
not
it's
participation
in
several
papers
or
several
projects
or
consistently
showing
up
at
meetings
for
like
two
months
or
maybe
leading
and
facilitating
a
meeting.
Any
number
of
those
activities
are
good
things
to
document
for
potential
contributors
to
set
expectations
on
those
role,
roles,
at
least
initially,.
H
B
E
B
So
next
up
is
around
the
charters
for
each
of
the
tags,
so
we've
had
the
charters
for
the
tags
for
a
fair
amount
of
time,
with
the
exception
of
the
brand
new
ones
and
I'm
curious.
How
do
you
all
feel
that
your
Charters
are
working
for
you
are?
Do
you
think
that
they're
adequately
scoped
for
the
kinds
of
requests
and
work
that
you
all
are
taking
on?
Do
you
feel
like
they're
too
confining?
G
G
Maybe
he
has
some
general
General
guidelines
about
tax
charters,
I
I,
to
be
honest,
yeah
I,
don't
know
because
I
haven't
seen
the
other
one,
so
I
wouldn't
be
able
to
comment
on
specifically,
you
know,
I
think,
protagon
time
the
charter
has
been
defined
for
I,
think
over
two
years
and
the
scope
is
pretty
well
defined
and
we
haven't
had
any
any
issues,
issues
with
that
or
any
or
any
need
to
actually
change
it.
G
D
D
But
it's
been
on
occasion
that
there's
been
well.
We
we
wanted
to
help
facilitate
information
about
how
particular
Technologies
were
used
or
yeah
yeah,
mostly
that
and
so
there's
been
some
effort
to
put
together
a
poll
once
or
twice.
We
didn't
ever
conclude
on
that,
but
I
don't
know
that
that
needs
to
be
explicitly
called
out,
but
that's
one
of
the
things
that
pops
to
mind.
C
Yeah
so
I'm
thinking,
we've
done
surveys,
we've
done
lots
of
surveys
as
far
as
all
of
that
goes,
but
this
seems
like
a
little
bit
more
like
well.
Okay,
I!
Guess
it
is
a
survey
sure
yes
go.
D
Ahead,
no,
no
I,
actually
I,
think
you
yeah,
that's
probably
the
more
proper
term
and
I
yeah.
To
give
a
more
specific
example,
to
the
extent
that
it's
helpful
is
just
like,
if
there
was
a
a
survey
oriented
toward,
maybe
the
the
radar
or
and
just
one
that
went
out
to
understand
it,
okay,
so
the
surveys
that
we
would
put.
C
Out
we
want
to
align
if
I
think
I'm
hearing
right
when,
like
the
the
you
know
articulating
here,
you
want
to
be
able
to
have
explicit
permission
to
be
able
to
do
surveys
that
then
like
influence,
like
the
the
end
user,
tech
radar
pieces
or
being
involved
in
that.
D
It
was
just
yeah,
I
guess:
I
am
not
being
concise.
It
was
just
more
like
a
yeah,
a
survey
of
some
of
the
same
topics
just
deeper
or
like
you
know,
because
those
some
of
the
radar
surveys
can
only
they're
relatively
broadened,
so
people
have
asked
for
additional
info
and
and
I
was
just
trying
to
contribute
to
the
conversation
so.
B
I
would
also
suggest
reaching
out
to
pushkar
and
time
security.
He
led
some
of
the
tax
security
surveys
in
response
to
the
cloud
native
security
white
paper
revisions
that
were
going
on
as
well
as
trying
to
get
a
better
understanding
on
the
usefulness
of
any
of
the
deliverables
that
are
coming
out
of
the
tag.
So
he
might
be
a
good
person
to
talk
through
about
how
he
went
through
with
the
cncf
to
put
together
a
survey.
What
were
some
of
our
considerations
in
doing
the
survey
questions?
D
Nice
yeah,
it
was
like,
like
much
of
that,
makes
a
lot
of
sense
that
particularly
like
trying
to
assess
and
have
metrics
around
the
usefulness
of
the
activities.
I
suspect.
This
next
statement
is
was
guarded
by
people's
time
once
again,
but
it
would
seem
like
potentially
an
activity
that
would
help
facilitate
it
might
Garner
additional
interest
and
contributors
into
the
tags
were,
if
once
a
quarter
or
at
some
frequency.
If
the
tag
chairs
were
to
write
up
sort
of
a
blog
post
on
here's,
what's
transpired?
D
I'm
kind
of
like
actually
to
the
extent
that
tags
like
tag
network
will
pretty
consistently
have
an
intro
and
a
deep
dive
at
kubecons,
like
the
effort
that
goes
into
preparing
that
is
about
much
in
the
same
that
might
go
into
a
blog
post
of
like
here's,
the
upcoming
projects,
here's
one
that
you
know,
here's
what's
happening
with
the
projects.
Here's
you
know.
G
Yeah
I
think
it's
yeah.
We
prepare
for
those
sessions
at
kubecon
and
all
the
things
that
we
write
up
could
be
used
in
in
a
blog
post.
So
together,
right
so
I
mean
it's
very
similar
content
and
it's
just
a
maybe
a
different
channel
of
delivering
it
right
by
email
or
by
by
something
on
the
website
or
the
cncf
website.
For
example,.
E
M
M
Yeah,
maybe
also
it's
a
bit
different
from
one
to
the
other,
maybe
but
I
don't
know
any
kind
of
tasks
that
go
beyond
the
that
that
are
kind
of
generic.
Maybe
we
are
we're
not
putting
them
there.
J
J
C
I
think
that
might
actually
be
related
to
like
the
kind
of
projects
that
are
coming
up
right
now.
I,
don't
think
anything
has
changed
directly.
I
think,
like
the
kind
of
projects
that
come
coming
up,
aren't
directly
app
delivery
related
and
to
answer
Ricardo's
question:
it's
not
in
the
charters
for
the
tag
it
is
in
the
process,
documentation
for
Toc
for
where
that
actually
puts
in.
M
B
Sounds
good
and
that
actually
reminds
me
of
something
else
we
talked
about
in
2022
was
around
establishing
better
Cadence
for
projects
to
reach
out
to
the
different
tags,
whether
or
not
it's
prior
to
each.
B
Each
change
in
level,
like
incubation,
for
instance,
having
them
go
and
meet
and
demonstrate
or
solicit
feedback
and
input
from
more
than
one
tag,
potentially
two
or
three,
depending
on
what
the
domain
is.
That
was
something
that
we
had
talked
about
in
the
in
the
past.
It
might
be
beneficial
here
to
potentially
incorporate
that
into
the
Milestones
from
the
earlier
portion
of
the
discussion,
just
to
increase
the
exposure
of
projects
to
the
tags
and
also
potentially
Drive
some
more
contributions
to
the
tags
themselves
from
those
projects.
N
One
quick
question
so
I
have
put
it
in
the
chat
Windows
last
time.
Also
when
I
joined
the
main
thing
I
was
asking
about
the
graduation
proposal
for
istio,
so
I
understand
that
the
tag
is
waiting
for
some
more
members
to
join,
so
just
wanted
to
know
whether
there
is
any
approximate
timeline
by
which
we
could
get
a
sponsor
to
help
us
with
a
graduation
proposal.
This
is
for
HTO.
B
So
I
can't
commit
to
a
timeline
right
now.
I
do
know
that
we
have
several
Toc
members
that
are
currently
assigned
for
different
projects
that
are
seeking
graduation
for
incubation
or
for
graduation
proper.
We
do
have
an
action
to
potentially
go
through
when
we're
reshuffling.
The
TOC
Liaisons
to
also
consider
the
handoff
on
some
of
these
and
I'm
sure
istio
will
be
part
of
that
discussion,
but
I
don't
have
a
timeline
for
that
Amy.
Do
you
have
any
insights
on
what
our
schedule
looks
like.
C
C
And
that
is
in
the
projects
waiting
for
sponsors
in
the
meeting
minutes
doc.
What
I
can
see
from
all
of
this
is
that,
like
I
mean,
we've
got
a
lot
of
folks
on
the
call
who
are
actually
currently
working
through
some
due
diligence
pieces
in
here
with
projects
as
those
clear
up.
As
you
see,
those
move
into
voting
they'll
have
more
space
to
be
able
to
take
more
stuff
on
so
basically
like
here.
Here's
our
list.
This
is
where
we're
working
through.
E
C
And
with
that,
is
there
any
updates
for
folks
on
the
the
current
list
that
we've
got
up
here?
I
know
that
we've
got
some
folks
running
out
key
cloak.
You
were
in
like
Ricardo
you're
in
public
comment
for
like
the
next
two
days,
but
everybody
else
isn't
voting
anything
else.
Rising.
B
I
will
say
that
Falco
is
getting
very
close.
There
are
some
other
items
that
I
need
to
take
care
of
with
that
and
Justin
and
I
need
to
Circle
back
together
for
psyllium
I
need
to
Circle
back
with
Katie
to
understand
a
little
bit
about
more,
where
we're
at
where
she's,
at
with
her
portion
of
the
review,
as
well
as
mine,.
M
It
can
give
a
quick
update
on
Google
as
well.
This
has
been
lagging
a
bit,
but
I'll
kick
it
off
this
week.
H
Yeah
I
can
give
an
update
on
the
cryo
and
Nikita
so
cry
all
we.
We
have
one
more
interview
to
conduct.
We
have
finished
all
the
other
interview,
the
doctor
interviews,
the
video
we're
starting
to
schedule
those
interviews
we
saw
with
end
users.
C
Wonderful
good
updates,
all
thank
you
and
with
that
we
are
over
time,
but
thank
you
so
much
Emily
for
leading
us
through
the
POC
check
chairs.
We
will
see
you
for
this
next
March
23rd
21st,
yes,
for
the
next
Toc
check,
chair
meeting
no.