►
From YouTube: CNCF TOC Meeting 2020-07-07
Description
CNCF TOC Meeting 2020-07-07
A
A
B
C
A
A
A
D
A
E
A
Wandering
through
and
it
doesn't
look
like-
we've
got
any
of
those
folks
here,
but
so
that
being
said,
but
you've
got
some
Claire
Native
summit
China
talks,
which
is
kind
of
exciting
in
here.
That's
kind
of
one
things
that
I
wanted
to
highlight
was
hey.
Look.
We
are
going
to
be
able
to
do
that
and
then
they're
doing
things
so
other
fun
things
just
in
Cormack
cloud
native,
build
pecs.
F
A
D
D
D
G
And
I'm
actually
taking
Josh
this
place
also
is
supposed
to
be
here
so
I'm
kind
of
doing
what
the
JavaScript
community
calls
battle
decks
right
now,
so
hey
Josh
could
not
be
your
senses.
Regrets
I
am
here
in
his
steed
hello,
everyone.
How
are
you
I,
hope
everyone's
doing
all
right,
safe
staying
inside
staying
sane
and
things
like
that?
We
have
actually
been
doing
a
ton
of
work
inside
of
this
sake,
and
of
course
we
are
always
looking
for
new
contributors.
G
The
first
thing
that
we
have
published
is
a
letter
sent
to
the
maintainer
x',
with
a
survey
link
and
a
ton
of
other
stuff.
The
action
here
for
toc
and
everybody
that's
on
this
call
right
now
is
to
please
take
the
survey
not
only
just
the
survey
inside,
but
there's
a
ton
of
other
introductory
information
about
our
group
in
there
and
how
we
can
provide
support
to
your
projects.
G
We
will
be
also
doing
sort
of
this
as
a
focus
group
style,
because
we
know
that
people
have
survey
fatigue.
So
you
can,
you
might
catch
me
at
one
of
your
projects.
Community
meetings,
I
might
come,
introduce
myself
and
say
hello
and
do
sort
of
a
live
question-and-answer
session.
If
folks,
don't
necessarily
have
the
time
to
do
the
survey,
the
survey
is
important
to
us
because
it
has
to
do
with
where
we're
going
to
be
starting
with
a
lot
of
the
sub-project
activity
that
I'm
about
to
tell
you
about.
G
G
We
did
have
a
change
of
chairs
as
well
lately
if
anybody
missed
that
Jared
unfortunately
has
some
personal
obligations
that
he
wants
to
attend
to,
but
he's
still
going
to
be
sticking
around
and
contributing
to
the
group.
Steven
augustus
is
going
to
be
stepping
up
into
the
chair
duties,
so
you
may
see,
even
here
next
month,
doing
the
status
and
then,
as
far
as
some
of
the
sub-project
activities
to
drill
down
a
little
bit
deeper,
we've
got
a
governance
working
group.
Now
that's
spun
up
officially
a
contributor
growth
group.
G
So
those
meetings
are
now
being
moved
to
accommodate
better
times
for
those
folks,
the
governance
working
groups
also
been
working
on
the
maintainer
multi-org
requirement.
It's
obviously
a
very
testy
issue
that
you
all
have
seen
that
Josh
moved
to
the
TOC
repo
instead
of
our
contributor
strategy,
repo
TOC
members
and
the
community
is
also
very
welcome
to
look
in
our
issue
log
back
vlog
inside
of
the
contributor
strategy
stuff.
That's
that's
just
things
that
we're
working
on
that
make
it
moved
over
to
the
TOC
repo
once
they're
in
a
better
state
TVD.
G
So
we
can
all
talk
together
about
that
I
know.
Several
projects
have
already
made
huge
strides
in
this
area.
Some
have
already
submitted
and
approved
PRS.
Others
are
forming
working
groups
like
kubernetes.
So
how
can
we
all
learn
together
from
that?
So
that's
going
to
be
the
first
maintainer
circle
topic,
caring,
true
is
going
to
be
helping
me
Karen
goes
great
events.
If
I'm
sure
everybody
on
the
line
knows
Karen,
so
parents
can
help
help
out
with
that
as
well.
G
The
contributor
growth
team
has
been
working
on
documentation
plate
and
the
idea
of
the
template
repo
for
projects
to
fork,
essentially
with
some
templates
in
there
like
contributing
guides,
author
author
got
MD,
etc,
and
this
also
I
just
want
to
reiterate,
is
based
on
a
lot
of
the
survey
feedback
that
we're
gonna
be
getting
back.
So
if
there
is
something
that
you
like
about
a
project,
please
fill
it
out.
You
don't
even
necessarily
have
to
fill
out
the
whole
thing.
This
is
just
really
about
like
best
practices
of
how
we
can
surface
that
data
right.
G
So
I've
already
mentioned
the
bullet
below
about
kubernetes
working
group
naming
we
are
obviously
staying
close
to
them
with
Steven
now
being
a
chair
of
of
ours
as
well.
So
we
have
some
of
that
continuity
there,
which
is
nice.
This
is
also
an
open
invite
for
all
of
you
to
attend
our
bi-weekly
Thursday
meetings
or
any
of
our
working
group
meetings.
The
next
working
group
is
actually
today
in
a
few
hours
and
that's
the
governance
working
group.
We
also
have
been
doing
some
side
reviews
of
projects-
that's
not
even
necessarily
on
this
slide.
G
D
G
Anyone
that
considers
themselves
an
upstream
contributor,
we'll
work
out
the
fuzzy
details
on
the
end.
We
just
want
to
hear
kind
of
from
everybody.
That's
working
upstream,
so
main
tears
are.
You
know
the
most
preferred,
especially
because
there's
some
kind
of
questions
on
there
that
will
feed
into
maintainer
circle
as
well
so
main
to
maintain
errs
the
preferred,
but
I'd
rather
see
all
projects
represented,
then
wait
around
very
big
containers
and.
D
C
G
Can
certainly
talk
about
this
I
mean
this.
Is
you
can
see
on
the
the
survey
itself?
It's
a
much
more
deep
dive
into
the
actual
mechanics
of
how
you
run
your
groups,
whereas
the
maintainer
survey
I
think
it's
like
a
pulse
on
CN
CF,
s--
work
and
a
pulse
on
the
TOC
and
a
pulse
on
it's
just
like
a
general
just
pulse
of
how
you're
doing
I
think
where
this
is
like
hey
do
you
all
have
contributing
and
markdown
files?
G
Do
you
really
like
them
like
that
kind
of
stuff,
so
feel
free
to
delegate
to
I
mean
if
you
are
a
busy
maintainer
and
you've
got
folks
growing
up
in
the
ranks
I
here
take
the
survey
you
know.
Take
the
survey
for
this
kind
of
thing.
That's
fine,
but,
like
I
said
I'm,
one
I'm
happy
to
you
know
definitely
combine
in
the
future,
but
this
is
hopefully
a
one-off
I.
Don't
necessarily
see
that
you
know
going
into
this
depth
from
here
on
out
with
50
other
projects.
B
B
There
was
a
much
diligence
on
the
project.
The
folks
are
folks
pretty
pumped
I
was
good
speaking
of
projects
getting
accepted.
Three
sandbox
projects
have
also
recently
come
through
and
been
accepted
into
sandbox
one
is
kuma,
another
be
Fe
and
another
CNI,
a
genie
so
congrats
to
those
projects.
Those
maintainer
x'
chaos.
Mesh
is
I'm
also
up
for
review
under
the
new
sandbox
project
proposal
process
and
is
reapplying
for
consideration.
B
The
well
in
some
respects,
Parris
is
making
us
look
a
bit
bad
we've
been
busy
as
well,
although
we
have
not
not
as
many
updates
since
last
time,
we
met
we're
we're
working
on
collecting
interested
parties
in
the
as
we
go
to
form
the
surface
mesh
performance
working
group.
Some
of
those
early
interested
parties
are
listed
here.
B
B
I
think
your
D
and
yep-
that's
just
oversight
and
I.
Think
on
the
listing
here
is
actually
the
list
of
interested
parties
of
the
service
messages,
specifically
that
are
interested
in
there's
multiple
aspects
of
what
the
working
group
is
going
to
be
walking
through
the
short
of
it
here
to
your
question
is
there's
actually
a
long
list
of
service
meshes
that
much
earlier
on
have
express
interest
and
desire
to
participate.
B
Linker
D
is
certainly
one
of
those
linked.
Your
D
I
guess
I
won't
go
won't
go
through
the
list,
but
it's
just
a
we've.
We
probably
talked
to
about
twenty
different
service
meshes,
each
of
which,
at
various
points
have
said
they
are
keenly
interested
in
understanding
their
own
performance
and
being
kind
of
well.
You
know
being
well
represented
in
under
that
topic.
Under
the
topic
of
performance.
E
I
I
So
our
question:
we
are
silicone
company.
Actually,
we
are
its
am
a
veneer.
We
are
in
5g
radio,
a
packet
current
recently,
you
probably
know
we
won
this
project
so
how
silicone
specific
requirements
into
it,
because
we
have
a
lot
of
questions
on
much.
We
are
currently
using
easier,
which
is
not
very
good
to
what
we
are
due
to
the
use
cases
that
silicone
as
how
can
we
collaborate
and
inject
our
view?
What
needs
to
be
done.
B
B
Those
are
relationships
that
you
know
that
we're
frequently
spending
time
with
we're
not
in
a
position
to
to
dictate
to
them
what
to
do,
but
what
all
have
been
receptive
to
this
type
of
feedback
and
so
yeah,
please
ping
me
in
advance
of
the
or
or
can
Owens
the
other
chair
on
sig
network
in
advance
of
you
just
after
this
call.
Let's,
let's
that's
a
very
interesting
topic.
B
I
And
we
can
become
discussed
about
deployment
of
what
we
are
doing
in
public
network
versus
private
network
and
how
it
impacts
networking
in
general.
It
is
much
more
I
would
say,
dependences,
it's
not
just
service
measure
as
much
as
very
impacted
by
what
what
would
be
very
interesting
to
discuss
totally.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
D
C
So
from
our
and
the
there
is
a
threat
which
is
kind
of
lonely,
Amy
told
me
she
will
be
sending
the
thing
today,
which
I
failed
to
do
sorry
furnace
for
in
third
year.
We
are
looking
for
nominations
again,
so
anyone
who
has
any
suggestions
or
interest
or
anything
please
focus
next
call
right
after
this
call
there's
an
update
on
incubations,
actually
I
didn't
update
the
slides,
but
that
for
me
and
cortex
did
answer
the
questions
that
they
are
currently
in
progress.
With,
with
getting
back
on
questions
and
fairness,
it's
not
a
public
comment
phase.
C
We
did
start
work
on
on
data
analysis
as
a
subject,
and
we
started
with
the
document
which
is
correcting
use
cases,
and
we
will
be
discussing
this
in
35
minutes
and
we
also
intend
to
work
on
best
current
practices
talks,
but
there
is
nothing
yet
which
which
we
could
link
or
show.
Let's
do
a
quick
update.
D
J
It's
looking
for
a
TRC
sponsor
if
anyone
is
willing
to
do
that,
a
cube
it
by
the
way
we
do
already
have
TLC
sponsors
so
really
really
are
just
sort
of
following
the
process.
Now
it
should
go
into
public
comment.
I
believe
this
week,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
doesn't
it
Elena
is
here
she's
been
doing
a
great
job
of
looking
after
us
as
a
cig,
we've
also
had
a
bunch
of
interesting
interactions
with
a
bunch
of
different
projects,
and
so
maybe
I
should
actually
step
back
say.
Run.
J
Many
many
things
that
have
the
word
in
word
containing
them
are
included
in
the
scope
of
this
thing,
so
we've
been
doing
a
pretty
good
job,
and
actually
one
of
my
coaches
Ricardo
has
been
doing
a
really
good
job
of
reaching
out
to
projects
that
are
kind
of
outside
of
the
direct
C&C
f-word
community
and
interacting
with
those.
So
we've
had
a
bunch
of
those
going
on
recently.
J
J
J
These
kinds
of
things,
which
are
increasingly
becoming
necessary,
Mellanox
advanced
network
interface
cards,
are
another
example,
so
all
of
these
things
are
becoming
increasingly
used
in
particularly
machine
learning
environments,
so
they're
becoming
very
interesting,
and
it's
very
useful
to
have
standards
for
these
things
to
be
in
to
interface
with
through
cloud
native
technologies.
So
that's
another
area
that
we're
working
closely
with
and
that's
it.
D
K
So
we
have
votes
out
for
their
graduation
of
Ti,
kV
and
rook.
The
the
you
know,
we've
done
these
Allegiance
and
the
public
comment
periods
was
done,
lost
the
last
couple
of
weeks.
We
also
have
proved
eager
who
have
presented
sake
as
a
project
for
incubation
as
a
sacred
like
to
recommend
this
to
move
forward.
So
we
need
talk,
sponsors
and
we
can
start
a
due
diligence
review.
K
The
pro
Vita
is
a
streaming
storage
project,
so
there
are.
There
are
some
similarities
to
both
the
Nats
project
and
to
Africa,
for
example,
so
and
there's
quite
a
detailed
comparison
in
the
in
the
in
the
proposal.
Document
and
they've
already
and
Privia
have
already
done
a
fairly
extensive
presentation
with
Q&A.
That's
the
six
storage.
K
If,
if
any
of
the
talk
members
want
to
want
to
have
a
review
of
that,
the
CCF
storage
landscape
version,
2
was
released
on
Monday
there's
a
link
to
the
white
paper
there
and
the
CN
CF
team
helped
us
out
and
put
a
blog
post
together,
which
was
kind
of
cool
and
we've
also
got
a
new
project
coming
up.
Who.
K
D
K
D
D
D
A
D
Okay,
so
I
think
the
topic
is
this:
maybe
you
know
have
a
bit
of
discussion
around
the
maintainer
diversity
requirements
and
so
the
issue
that's
linked
in
the
sunlights
really
I'm,
gonna
paraphrase
they're
saying
we
have
this
graduation
requirement.
That
says
there
should
be
and
maintain
us
from
more
than
one
organization
we
should
document.
Why
that's
a
requirement,
a
long
thread
ensues
and
kind
of
coming
out
of
that
discussion.
D
Alexis
ended
up
writing
a
pretty
detailed
document.
With
some
suggestions
around
clarifying
essentially
saying
we
could
have
a
steering
committee.
You
know
it
doesn't
have
to
just
be
maintained.
As
you
know,
control
of
a
project
direction
doesn't
just
have
to
be
in
the
hands
of
people
who
are
making
code
commits,
and
so
he's
basically
come
up
with
this
proposal.
I'm
just
gonna
try
and
find
the
link
and
copy
it.
D
M
M
M
Would
say
TBD,
as
is
pointed
out
in
the
comments
in
the
the
original
text.
Alexis
is
talking
about
an
appointed
steering
committee
which
is
going
to
be
appropriate,
particularly
for
projects
that
are
trying
to
bootstrap
multi
organization
right
if
you're,
trying
to
bootstrap
multi
organization.
If
you
have
an
elected
steering
committee,
it's
gonna
largely
elect
people
from
the
majority
sponsoring
company
and
you
won't
have
solved
your
problems.
G
N
D
Think
my
feeling
is
that
it
wouldn't
be
a
absolutely
prescribed
model
in
the
same
sense
that
we
don't
really
prescribe
any
models
anywhere
else,
but
it
would
be
a
model
that
we
recommend
and
that
we'd
say
you
know
you
may
have
an
alternative
that
works
and
we'd
be
happy
to
consider
it.
But
you
might
also
want
to
consider
this
as
an
option.
M
The
I
would
see
more
narrowly
focused
projects
as
continuing
to
have
our
sort
of
quote
unquote.
Traditional
model
of
having
a
group
of
named
maintained
errs,
who
are
the
senior
leadership,
because
you
know
if
your
entire
project
consists
of
like
three
different
repositories
and
that
maintainer
pool
is
a
total
of
ten
people
and
they
represent
multiple
organizations
already,
then
you
don't
have
any
good
reason
to
add
a
steering
committee.
M
The
reasons
that
a
steering
committee
would
be
you
know
either
a
your
again
trying
to
bootstrap
multi
organization
and
and
using
this
mechanism
do
so
or
be.
Your
project
is
actually
spread
out
across.
You
know
50
different
repositories
because
you
have
drivers
and
plugins
and
that
sort
of
thing-
and
you
want
to
make
sure
that
the
sub
projects
are
concerns
are
being
represented
in
general
strategic
direction.
M
The
so
you
know
those
projects
would
definitely
a
steering
committee
is
a
good
idea
for
them.
So
I
can
actually
see
you
know.
I
mean
obviously
gonna
have
all
kinds
of
models,
but
I
can
see
those
as
being
the
two
main
models
for
for
C
and
C
F,
depending
again
on
the
structure
of
the
underlying
project.
D
J
O
List
can
you
hear
me
yes,
so
one
of
the
things
that
we
have
in
the
Kuban
it
aside
is.
The
steering
committee
is
not
involved
in
the
technical
decisions,
so
the
maintenance
Dee
seems
to
be
more
oriented
towards
the
technical
decisions.
So
I
don't
know
how
steering
steering
is
oriented
towards
the
community
side
of
things
rather
than
the
technical
decisions
that
are
made
on
a
day
to
day
basis.
So
how
does
steering
I
I
can't
get
my
head
around?
How
steering
can
help
the
decisions
that
are
gonna
be
taken.
O
K
So
it's
not
about
it's
not
about
enforcing
control.
It's
it's!
It's
about
adding
sort
of
like
a
layer
of
governance
so
to
the
steering
committee
we
would
be
able
to
lays
with
the
CNC
have
talk
or
the
executive
staff
and
the
idea
being
is
that
the
least
once
a
quarter
or
whatever
they
would
be
able
to
report
back?
K
Then
the
end
user
has
a
route
via
the
steering
committee
to
erase
that
as
an
issue,
and
if
you
know
some
sort
of
resolution
can't
be
achieved,
then
the
you
know
that
the
TRC
or
the
CNCs
can
get
involved.
You
know
with
with
obviously
the
ultimate
sanction
being
that's.
You
know
they
take
down
grades.
The
status
of
the
projects
or
whatever
you.
M
Know
I
would
say.
Ideally
the
steering
committee
would
have
some
ability
to
actually
appoint
maintain
errs,
because
obviously
one
of
the
other
concerns
with
having
too
much
single
organization
dominance
is
that
somebody
who
would
have
otherwise
qualified
to
be
a
maintainer
never
gets
promoted
to
maintainer
because
they
don't
work
for
the
right
organization.
K
So
I
think
you
know
that
there's,
there's
a
set
of
compromises
and-
and
maybe
a
steering
committee
might
be
a
way
of
helping
with
the
governance
and
maintaining
you
know
the
the
core
principles
of
what
the
city
is
trying
to
do
to
ensure
it's
a
healthy
project
that
is
working
for
its
end
users
without
it
necessarily
without
necessary,
penalizing
sort
of
a
nice
for
a
company.
That's
actually,
you
know
happily
pane
lead
from
the
innovation.
D
N
Stance
on
that,
yes,
I
mean
I.
Did
they
haven't
actually
announced
anything
as
far
as
I
know,
but
yeah.
You
know.
If
Google
decided
to
start
its
own
foundation,
then
it
would
not
actually
be
vendor-neutral
so
and
part
of
the
reason
of
having
something
like
a
steering
committee
is
just
to
assure
that
venture,
bender
net
neutrality.
D
E
J
Just
one
last
comment
on
on
that
last
topic,
so
they
seem
to
be
two
kind
of
fundamentally
different
concerns
that
one
is
the
longevity
of
a
project.
So
so,
if
somebody
takes
on
a
project-
and
it
you
know
collapses,
then
that's
bad,
especially
if
they've
bet
their
business
on
it
and
the
other
one
is
that
this
project
continues
to
exist
quite
happily,
but
that
any
given
user
or
competitive
vendor
or
whatever
does
not
have
influence
over
the
direction
of
that
project,
and
that
seems
like
a
different
concern.
J
I'd
be
curious.
What
the
CN
CF
sort
of
opinion
on
that
are
we
trying
to
solve
both
of
those
with
with
diversity
of
you
know,
company
diversity
specifically
with
in
the
contributors,
or
are
we
prepared
to
separate
those
two
concerns
and
say
there
are
actually
different
concerns
and,
and
we
can
address
one
and
not
the
other
one
or
we
can
dress
the
to
consensus
separately,
I,
don't
if
that
question
makes
sense.
D
D
Think
Alexis
had
some
quite
good
words
in
here
about
good
faith
roadmap.
I
think
you
know
that
that
idea
that
well
we're
not
going
to
suddenly
take
the
project
off
in
one
particular
direction
so
that
it
particularly
supports
one
particular
vendors
model.
If
there
are
other
valid
models
that
the
project
should
be
supporting,
I
think
both
those
two
things
are
are
important
to
users.
I.
P
P
You
know
just
the
usefulness
of
the
project
and
the
adoption
of
the
you
know.
Adoption
of
the
code
by
the
end
users-
and
you
know,
even
if
something's
under
a
single
vendor
right
I-
think
that
you
know
that
still
can
be.
The
longevity
can
still
be
achieved.
It's
just
that.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
the
that
the
tech,
not
that
you
know
the
technical
direction
or
the
the
roadmap
of
the
of
the
project,
isn't
tied
to
a
single
vendor.
But
that's
that's
generally.
P
D
Yeah,
it's
slightly
academic.
If
we
have
a
model
that
we
think
protects
in
some
way
in
both
those
things
you
know
if
a
steering
committee
mobile
allows
for
things
like
you
know
the
dominant
vendor
deciding
that
they
don't
want
to
invest
in
a
project
anymore,
if
there's
still
users
and
expertise
and
interest
in
that
project.
The
steering
committee
is
in
a
position
to
yeah.
P
But
then,
but
then
that
becomes
that
that
becomes
making
a
problem
right
that
the
steering
committee
doesn't
solve.
So
that's
why
I'm
thinking
we're
trying
to
primarily
solve
for
the
that,
as
long
as
the
project
is
being
maintained
that
it's,
you
know
that
it's
good,
it's
not
it's
not
going
in
a
direction
that
would
like
lock
the
vendors
out
I
mean
even
if
you
can
imagine
extreme
scenarios
like
you
know
like,
like
a
service
match
requiring
you
know
the
use
of
certain.
You
know.
P
J
D
I,
do
you
think
it's
important
if
we
think
about
the
de-risking
of
a
project?
You
know
when
we
say
that
project
is
graduated,
it's
something
that
and
then
Jesus
should
be
able
to
kind
of
bet
their
business
on
really
and
I
think
we
should
be
at
least
requiring
some
story
on
continuity.
You
know
along
the
lines
of
what
happens.
If
you
know
the
single
company
decides
they're
no
longer
in
interest
in
it.
What's
the
contingency.
P
J
You
know
implicitly
influences
the
direction
of
the
project
and
very
few
other
companies,
or
no
other
companies
step
forward
and
actually
provide
resources
to
work
on
the
project,
and
you
know,
buy
resources.
I
mean
people
with
the
appropriate
skills
and
experience
and
whatever
else
might
be
required
to
be
effective
on
the
project.
J
I
think,
if
you
want
to
influence
the
view,
the
direction
of
a
project
you
you
donate
engineer
to
the
project
and
they
work
on
internet
influence
it
that
way
and
if
you
get
blocked,
if
you
get
you
as
a
company,
get
prevented
from
contributing
in
that
way,
then
then
there
should
be
some
escalation
procedure
to
address
that,
but
I'm
sort
of
wondering
whether
sitting
on
the
sidelines
telling
a
project
what
to
do
without
actually
contributing
engineers
to
work
on
the
project
is,
is
sort
of
a
little
amid
concern.
So.
D
J
Is
that
a
you
know
the
steering
committee
can
say
whatever
they
like,
but
if,
if
the
engineers
who
building
project
don't
do
that,
then
then,
like
it,
doesn't
matter
what
the
steering
committee
says
so
I
just
think
it
potentially
becomes
a
political
problem.
Rather,
you
know
I'm
not
sure
that
it
addresses
the
engineering
challenges.
D
What
essentially
preventing
gatekeeping
on
the
maintainer,
so
you
know
company
a
has
all
the
maintainer
x'
and
then
blocks
Company
B
from
having
any
maintain
is
I.
Think
the
steering
committee
model
can
help
with
that
in
terms
of
assessing
whether
or
not
somebody
really
should
be
accepted
as
a
maintainer
is
there
cuz?
Yes,
I
continue
being
blocked
just
because
they're
from
the
wrong
vendor.
D
O
How
was
hose
does
that
help
less
like
when
we
say
that
had
just
having
steering
committees
enough,
then
you
are
basically
removing
the
incentive
for
anybody
to
add
maintenance
from
other
companies
right
so
and
they're
gonna,
say
Oh.
Our
Charter
says
this.
You
know
so
it's
enough,
so
we
don't
really
need
to
try.
We.
O
To
try
so
that's
the
problem
and
the
sharing
the
trick.
Technical
people
will
tell
the
steering
committee
look
of
you
here
are
the
reasons
why
we
can't
get
them
on
board,
or
you
know
they
are
here
for
six
months
and
they
are
gone
or
whatever
they
will
come
up
with
something
or
the
other
which
justifies
their
point
of
view
and
steering
committee
has
no
way
to
judge
whether
the
input
that
you're
getting
is
correct
or
not.
D
K
Can
I
just
make
a
couple
of
comments
on
this
just
to
give
it
a
bit
more
color
so
so
we're
the
steering
committee
is
actually
supposed
to
be
composed
of
you
know
the
maintainer
themselves
and
users
and
people
who
are
using
the
projects
right.
So
so
it's
not.
It's
not
like
some
third
party
arbitrary
people
that
are
that
are
on
the
steering
committee
and
the
other
thing
is
today.
K
K
You
know,
I,
don't
just
completely
speak
for
Alexis
here,
but
I
I.
Don't
think.
Alexis
was
suggesting
that
the
steering
committee
has
this
controlling
function,
it's
more
of
a
an
escalation
part
and
a
way
of
resolving
issues
before
they
become
kind
of
issues
and
to
help
you
know
work
with
the
maintainer.
K
It's
because
the
maintainer
czar
also
on
the
steering
committee
right,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
one
of
the
risks
for
projects
becoming
unsuccessful
is,
is
you
know
if
they
can't
get
that
critical
mass
of
innovators
and
if
a
project
is
currently
successful
and
has
a
critical
mass
of
innovators
from
a
particular
company,
forcing
additional
maintainer
its
to
come
on
board
just
for
the
sake
of
hitting
a
tick
box
and
in
particular
criteria
may
not
necessarily
be
beneficial
to
the
company
to
the
project,
specifically
right
and
I.
Think
that's
that's.