►
From YouTube: CNCF TOC Meeting 2020-04-21
Description
CNCF TOC Meeting 2020-04-21
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
A
Special
requests
actually,
as
far
as
being
able
to
make
sure
that
we
walk
through
with
the
graduation
process
Review
for
sandbox
incubation
graduation,
and
this
is
based
off
of
Michelle's
great
work
and
there
was
a
request
to
be
able
to
document
where
things
go
when
the
repo.
So
yes,
after
this
meeting,
we
will
be
documenting
where
sig
chair
things
live.
A
That
was
that
was
today's
kind
of
special
request,
I'm
happy
to
be
able
to
drive
and
I'm
happy
to
be
able
to
let
Michelle
come
and
give
more
color
as
well,
and
there
was
a
note
around
toç
survey
results.
I
do
have
an
area
in
here
where
the
usig
chairs
can
be
able
to
kind
of
you
know,
phrase
things
up,
I
know
that
there
are
some
questions
of
projects
needing
input
from
at
least
one
sig
and
will
have
an
opportunity
to
be
able
to
put
more
in
so
with
that.
A
I
wanted
to
be
able
to
kind
of
pick
us
off
into
graduation
process.
Review
I
have
a
readme
in
PR
for
comment.
The
idea
here
is
that
it
creates
one
source
process
and
it
kind
of
outlines
our
project
lifecycle
and
includes
project
stages.
The
proposal
process,
which
I
know,
has
been
kind
of
in
flux
and
people
want
to
be
able
to
actually
get
totally
clear
around.
B
Okay,
because
they
were
asked
I,
think
the
information
is
pretty
hard
to
find
so
I'm
all
for
readme,
but
I
think
maybe
we
could
link
out
to
the
existing
Doc's
rather
than
duplicating
we.
You
know
we
put
in
quite
a
lot
of
effort
last
year
to
remove
a
lot
of
very
confusing
duplicate
information,
so
difficult
and
slightly
conflicting
information.
So
I'd
really
like
it.
If
we
could
just
have
you
know
one
set
of
documentation
for
each
process.
D
C
E
By
describing
graduation
is
a
level
I
think
that's
a
important
point,
Michelle
so
yeah,
absolutely
overloaded
term,
but
I
do
I
have
talked
to
a
couple
new
projects
lately
and
they
were
confused.
They
thought
they
had
to
enter
his
sandbox
and
like
go
through
the
progression.
Ya
know,
and
you
know,
if
we
moved
away
from
that.
A
A
C
C
F
C
Feel,
like
also
I
mean
this
is
a
good
high-level
right
I.
What
sandbox
means
to
everybody,
but
it's
just
I
think
we
need
to
be
more
explicit
of
what
about
what
like
project
gets
out
of
sandbox,
and
maybe
they
just
go
in
for
neutral
collaboration,
and
that's
okay,
just
think
that
it's
confusing
when
you're
any
person.
I
Just
to
ask
question
because
I'm
fairly
sure
we
covered
this
before
but
I,
don't
think
the
intention
was
a
project
stay
in
sandbox
indefinitely
right.
There
was
a
review
process
and
if
the
project
wasn't
progressing,
it
would
get
archived
so
so
I
guess
the
the
intention
is
so
it
does
move
up.
The
graduation
stack
it's
not
about
keeping
them
there
forever.
B
So
it
does
actually
have
that
bullet
point
about
any
project
that
realistically
what
intends
to
join
CN,
CF
incubation,
so
that
does
actually
already
exist,
but
I
still
think
it's
misleading
and
I'm
sure
that's
somewhere
in
here.
There
is
a
an
expectation,
it
does
say
the
very
end
of
this.
Let
me
send
the
link.
That's
at
the
very
end.
Cn
CF
sandbox
projects
can
stay
in
the
sandbox
indefinitely,
although
before
there
is
a
bullet
before
that
says
they
reviewed
on
an
annual
basis.
A
H
You
think
one
more
point
that
I
wanted
to
talk
about.
The
project
can
stay
in
sandbox
indefinitely
and
they
can
do
reviews
but
a
and
that's
for
the
health
of
the
project,
and
you
know
and
in
the
reviews
something
may
come
up
when
the
project
is
not
longer
being
used
anywhere
and
it
can
actually
be
archived
right,
so
yeah.
So
that's
I
think
that's
the
process
right.
Yes,.
B
G
Yet
so
I
mean
basically
anything
we
do
to
raise
the
requirements
to
get
into
incue
bation,
which
in
general
I
believe
that
we
should
do
then
mean
that
the
sandbox
becomes
more
important
for
projects
that
have
a
reason
to
be
affiliated
with
the
CNC
F.
The
technology
is
interesting,
but
they
don't
have
the
project
parts
of
being
a
project
together.
Yet.
B
A
Any
notes
around
the
proposal
requirements
here,
there's
particularly
note
about
how
sandbox
is
not
required
to
undergo
due
diligence.
An
incubation
would
require
end-users
activity
and
contributors
and
then
just
quick
review
around
how
the
process
is
currently
running,
which
is
a
projects
being
reviewed
by
a
sig
chosen
by
the
COC
to
review,
and
then
the
sig
makes
a
written
and
eken
recommendation
to
the
TOC
to
review
and
three
sponsors
are
required
for
any
questions
here.
Comments.
H
E
Was
part
of
that
template
that
should
be
part
of
the
foundation
so
so
long
as
all
the
cigs
are
using
the
same
template
I
think
there
was
still
some
contention
in
the
PR
around
that
where
we
need
to
come
up
with
I
mean
maybe
there's
different
categories
of
things
we
want
to
cover,
but
I
think
all
in
all.
We
probably
want
to
come
up
with
a
standard
set
of
things
we
want
to
collect,
and
then
each
cig
can
maybe
do
like
a
cube
customized
on
there.
A
Right
now
there
are
three
project
boards
to
be
able
to
say
where
you
actually
are
in
all
of
this
and
I
didn't
actually
get
a
screenshot
of
those,
but
that's
actually
included
in
the
the
readme
PR
as
well,
and
it
basically
says
here's
here's
the
lane
for
people
have
come
in.
They
need
to
be
triaged
around
like
which
cig
they
should
go
towards,
and
at
this
point
in
time,
we've
most
of
the
time
put
everything
over
into
like
the
thesis
it
gets
chosen
and
then
from
there
that
the
presentation
happens.
C
So
I
just
pasted
the
link
to
the
first
one
that
people
kind
of
projects
go
into,
and
so
we
call
this
board
the
initial
project
triage
and
sandbox
project
backlog.
So
once
the
once,
the
project
is
triaged
say
it
might
be
triaged
for
the
incubation
backlog
and
so
we'll
take
it
out
of
that
column
and
put
it
onto
another
board
paste
that
board
here
there
is
a
similar
one
for
graduation.
Each
column
highlights
the
stage
that
the
project
is
currently
in
and
you
might
be
wondering,
like
you
know,
who
triage
is
these
and
whatnot
I?
C
Don't
know
if
we
publicized
that,
where
a
rotation
but
the
TOC
has
been
on
a
triage
rotation
for
the
last
several
weeks,
so
there
is
one
person
that
is
responsible
for
going
through
and
ensuring
that
the
this
backlog
is
is
moving
forward.
So
I
feel,
like
that's,
been
going
pretty
smoothly
for
the
last
few
weeks.
The
new
process
but
I
think
given
that
context,
if
there
is
some
additional
feedback
here
and
how
we
can
improve
and
I'll
get
very
welcome.
E
C
People
I
think
so,
like
the
projects
are
linked
currently
in
Amy's
new
document.
So
we
could
follow
that
kind
of
follow
that
pull
request
and
ensure
that
it's
in
there.
But
you
know
when
I'll
just
create
an
issue
real,
quick
or
you're-
welcome
to
in
the
in
the
issue
queue
and
we
can
figure
out
where
the
best
place.
To
put
that
is-
and
maybe
that's
read
me-
maybe
that's
I'm
not
really
sure,
but
we
can
take
suggestions
there.
But
yes,
that's
a
great
idea
and
we
should
make
sure
that
the
links
are
publicized.
B
A
E
Could
we
really
something
new
to
this
process
and
see
if
they
felt
like
they
could
find
everything
easily
a
morning
if
we
suffer
from,
we
know
where
everything
is
compared
to
a
brand
new
person?
Is
there
any
couple
new
projects
that
we
could
go
back
and
do
a
post-mortem
with
them,
see
how
they
figure
it
out
how
to
get
things
going
to
better
customize?
Let.
E
Right
I'm
just
curious:
if
we
could
take
someone
who's
like
I've,
never
dealt
with
TOC
I,
don't
know
how
to
get
into
the
CN
CF.
He
here's
how
I
went
about
it
like
I
mean
we're
already
tainted.
We
we've
done
it
old
ways,
new
ways,
future
ways.
I
just
would
like
to
get
a
non
biased
opinion
about
how
they
found
stuff
and
if
they
knew
what
they
were
doing
or
they
were
lost
in
the
process,
because
that
would
give
us
a
good
way
that
we
should
be
changing
things
so.
B
L
A
All
right,
we
can
certainly
come
back
having
to
be
able
to
get
more
review
on
this
one,
but
I
wanted
to
be
able
to
move
on
towards
incubation,
which
I
think
is
kind
of
where
maybe
josh
is
moving
us
towards
as
well
and
Chet.
This
is
the
piece
where
due
diligence
would
come
up
and
would
be
available
here,
and
this
is
actually
where
I
think
the
governance
area
for
the
cig
contributor
strategy
is
going
to
be
looking
at
making
more
recommendations
here.
Is
that
correct.
G
C
When
you,
when
you
were
talking
about
governance
requirement
earlier
trash,
or
are
you
stating
that
a
project
should
follow
a
specific
type
of
governance,
or
were
you
talking
about
requiring
like
a
stipulation
to
governance,
and
not
you
know,
maybe
the
core
maintainer
is
need
to
be
like
from
multiple
companies.
I.
G
C
C
D
C
G
D
I
Hey
just
just
one
small
thing,
because
this
often
kind
of
falls
through
the
cracks
in
sandbox.
There
is
a
requirement
that,
or
or
there
is
one
set
of
criteria
that
that
that
is,
the
project
has
to
adopt
the
CN
CF
IP
policy.
So
you
know
things
like
the
Apache
License
and
those
sort
of
things,
and
while
it
isn't
against
to
Inc
you
to
to
to
sandbox,
it's
expected
that
sandbox
projects
do
that
as
part
of
their
membership.
C
I
didn't
quite
get
that
so
I
am
seeing
the
IP
policy
on
the
sandbox
requirement
area
and
on
the
incubation
stage
it
says
to
be
accepted
to
incubation
stage.
A
project
must
meet
the
sandbox
stage,
requirements
plus,
and
there
now
has
like
a
set
of
bullets.
So
I'd
love
to
understand
more
about.
You
know
what
is
specifically
confusing
or
where
that
information
is
missing.
C
I
It's
on
this
well,
it
is
a
little
bit
confusing
in
that
the
sandbox
projects
specify
that
you
have
to
use
the
IP
the
C&C
of
IP
policy
as
entry
criteria,
but
in
reality
that
often
requires
CN
CF
s--
help
to
get
them
to
that
stage.
So
we
have
had
cases
or
projects
drawing
at
sandbox
and
then
adopt
the
CN
CF
IP
policy,
while
there
sandboxed
members.
I
E
B
To
be,
they
have
to
meet
all
the
sandbox
requirements,
plus
the
incubation
ones.
In
order
to
go
to
incubation
I
also
think
that
you
know
the
TOC,
then
you
know
if
we
were
not
checking
for
things
like
the
IP
policy
that
would
be
pretty
weak
due
diligence
and
I.
Think
just
the
sandbox
state
requirements
are
pretty
clear:
you're
right
that
in
practice
they
actually
do
the
trademark,
transferral
and
the
IP
policy
as
part
of
kind
of
moving
into
the
sandbox,
but
I
didn't
think
I
didn't
think.
That's
really
is
that
really
caused
confusion.
I
mean.
C
I
can
see
I
can
see
where,
where
this
is
coming
from,
I
think
because
I
don't
know,
I've
been
around
the
Sancia
first,
a
few
years
now
so
I
understand,
like
you
agree
to
do
these
things
and
then
there's
a
transition
period
where
the
sensei
of
staff
helps.
You
actually
make
the
transition
like
the
specific
company.
While
the
project
is
under
a
specific
company,
their
legal
team
may
not
allow
you
to.
C
Actually,
you
know
make
those
kinds
of
changes
like
license
changes
and
things
like
that
and
I
think,
because
this
happens
sometimes
in
that
transition
period
like
if
we
want
to
continue
that
process.
Of
course,
then
we
should
explicitly
write
out,
but
there
is
a
transition
period
and
that
you
should
agree
to
these
things
and
once
your
projects,
once
this
pull
request,
is
merged,
then
we
will
start
this
transition
period
of.
Actually
you
know
getting
these
things.
I
I
H
L
It
doesn't
have
to
be
done.
Frank
you
bation
kidding.
If
you
go
into
incubation
without
going
sandbox,
the
IP
process
will
take
place
after
incubation,
so
I
don't
think
we
can
make
it
a
requirement
anyway,
but
I
think
it
normally
happens
within
a
few
weeks
and
and
I
think,
although
I
think
projects
are
accepted,
implicitly
I
think
they
would
be
kicked
out
if
it
doesn't
happen
within
a
few
weeks.
L
E
It
would
be
great
if
we
had
part
of
that
template
that
did
have
these
sandbox
things
that
need
to
be
checked
off.
If
they
come
in
through
incubation
I
mean
it
would
say
like
if
they
were
already
a
sandbox
project
that
would
already
be
done.
We'd
already
have
that
template
file
to
be
ready
to
roll,
but
yeah
we'd
need
to
include
I
expected
criteria
entering
incubation
to
be
done
as
well,
and
though
it
would
want
to
just
be
nice
to
have
it
right
there
up.
We.
I
I
E
Agree
but
I'm
saying
if
it's
not
if
I'm
a
brand
new
project
and
I
have
like
tons
of
companies
and
tons
of
support
and
it's
a
really
healthy
project
and
I'm
like
I'm
gonna,
go
for
incubation
out
of
the
gate.
I,
don't
know
why.
Logically
I
would
go
look
at
sound
box
requirements
when
I
do
that,
that's
all
I'm
getting
at
like
we
need
to.
I
M
B
Done
this
to
be
accepted
to
incubating
stage
a
project
must
meet
the
sandbox
stage,
requirements
class
and
then
a
list
of
bullets
and
similarly
at
graduation
stage,
it's
got
to
graduate
from
sandbox
or
incubating
status
or
for
a
new
project
to
join
us
graduated
project.
A
project
must
meet
the
incubating
stage,
criteria,
Plus
and
then,
instead
of
bullets,.
I
A
I
Just
one
quick
question:
we
have
had
a
couple
of
instances
where
a
project
didn't
neatly
fit
into
a
specific
sig
I
needed
to
go
through
more
than
one
sick,
I'm
kind
of
thinking
to
do.
We
do
we
deal
with
that
on
an
acetone
basis,
or
do
we
want
to
serialize
those
sick
presentations
or
finalize
some
more
I.
C
Also,
just
that
you
know
that
project
has
a
parent
sig
and
if
there
are
additional
recommendations,
then
they
all
go
into
that
one
recommendation
doc,
but
we
think
about
those
additional
recommendations.
As
just
affiliated,
we
want
those
opinions
to,
but
I
think
the
parents
sake
should
really
own
the
whole
process
of
getting
all
the
recommendations.
H
M
H
Person
driving
the
due
diligence
is
that
something
that
did
TOC
chooses
or
that
that's
something
that
you
know
for
incubation,
or
is
that
something
that
some
somebody
just
comes
up
and
it
says
I
want
to
do
it
right.
So
from
the
sick
point
of
view,
is
there
something
that
six
can
do
to
find
somebody
to
drive
the
due
diligence.
B
C
Behind
the
scenes,
ami
usually
sends
on
the
TOC
like
a
list,
I
think
it's
every
week
right
and
she's
every
week.
She
kind
of
like
lets
us
know
like
hey
these.
These
projects
need
incubation
with
you
and
and
where
everybody
is
actually
whatever
a
call
to
action.
There
are
so
we
kind
of
pick
from
that
list
based
on
availability,
like
Liz
said
just
add
some
color.
B
A
A
So,
in
the
interest
of
time,
I
do
want
to
be
able
to
move
us
on.
This
is
our
graduation
stage
and
you're
you're
correct,
and
that,
like
this
one
does
say
Liz
that,
like
projects
that
wish
to
move
from
incubating
to
graduation,
there
is
some
documentation
in
here
that
a
project
could
come
in
at
graduation.
Have
we
ever
had
that
happen
that
kubernetes
might've
been
the
only
one?
No.
A
A
A
Don't
see
anybody
in
chat
and
they
don't
see
anybody
like
you
know,
dancing
around.
We
may
have
run
everybody
out
of
energy
which
understandable,
but
this
one
does
not
actually
have
a
flowchart
for
this
right
now.
We
can
certainly
look
towards
being
able
to
build
that,
but
right
now
this
is
really
just
like
here's.
The
criteria
and
process
at
this
point
is
being
able
to
have
a
TOC
sponsor
being
able
to
call
for
public
comment
and
then
being
able
to
move
to
a
vote
in
our.
B
C
C
No
there's
actually
not
really
the
standard
due
diligence
process
so
like
the
due
diligence
happens
at
incubation
and
then
I
wish
I
could
find
the
actual
I
think
I
found
that
actually,
ok,
so
I'm
gonna
link
here,
but
you've
referenced
the
due
diligence
document
from
incubation
and
if
there
are
things
that
have
been
laid
out
in
the
incubation,
due
diligence
document
that
were
highlighted
to
make
sure
we
address
before
graduation.
Those
are
addressed
during
the
process,
but
there
is
not
necessarily
a
new
temp
like
a
new
due
diligence
template
that
you
have
to
go
through.
C
C
At
that
point,
Machias,
the
TOC
member
walking
back
project
or
graduation
kicks
off
a
two-week
period
for
a
public
comment
if
he
or
she
or
they
feel
that
there's
nothing
left
to
address
and
in
that
time
any
sake
any
community
member
can
raise
any
concerns
or
endorsement
or
anything
like
that.
Sig's
can
take
some
time
to
discuss.
C
If
you
know
they
want
to
discuss
more
about
that
project
in
their
own
meetings
or
on
their
mailing
lists,
at
the
end
of
that
public
comment
period,
the
TOC
votes,
if
there
were
issues
that
were
raised
during
the
comment
period,
then
the
TOC
can
also,
at
the
end
of
the
public
period,
move
to
have
a
full
TOC
presentation
for
that
graduating
project.
Before
calling
for
a
vote
to
address
any
concerns.
F
I
have
a
question,
so
we
have
reason
we
are
raising
the
bar
for
graduation
and
we
are
moving
the
governance
from
certified
for
incubation
and
we
are
moving.
Their
governance
is
from
radiation
to
incubation.
Would
there
be
any
changes
to
the
graduation
process
operating
our
ease
in
the
bar
for
graduation.
A
M
M
A
A
Want
to
be
able
to
move
on
in
the
last
15
minutes,
or
so
this
was
a
time
that
I
was
going
to
well
ten
minutes
now.
I
know
that
there
was
some
questions
from
sig
app
delivery.
I,
don't
see
any
of
them
on
the
line,
so
we
will
follow
up
offline
with
them,
but
this
is
the
time
for
any
of
the
other
SIG's
to
be
able
to
surface
anything
that
they
wanted
to
kind
of
put
on
either.
You
know
short
conversation
here
or
an
agenda
future.
A
N
My
question
was:
it
might
be
honest
here,
but
if
it's
not,
then
I'm
just
going
to
do
it,
that's
Richard
for
a
secure
person
ability
there's
three
point
of
order,
just
as
a
general
FYI.
First,
we
will
start
having
bi-weekly
meetings
every
second
Tuesday
centers
around
to
both
the
sick
list
and
entity.
You
see
so
everyone
is
aware.
Second,
we
were
talking
to
Steve
Flanders
who's,
it's
Blanca
and
he's
also
both
with
open
telemetry.
N
A
M
I'm,
just
that
we've
got
a
couple
projects
under
review
and
one
of
the
most
recent
was
chaos
mesh
or
is
chaos
mesh.
They
are
in
process
of
soliciting
POC
supporters.
The
cig
review
of
that
project
isn't
complete,
but
they
were
asking
about
how
they
should
best
go
about.
Soliciting
support
and
I
promised
that
I
would
bubble
that
up
here
as
a
as
a
venue
for
that
itself
is.
M
H
You
know
we
have
a
one
project,
we
reinforce
sandbox
metal,
cue,
they
presented
our
last
meeting
on
Thursday
and
so
we're
for
gathering
some
information
to
kind
of
create
an
artifact
and
write
a
recommendation
to
the
TOC.
So
that's
it
on
the
project.
We
have
another
meeting
or
another
presentation
scheduled
for
Quay,
which
is
a
container
registry.
So
that's
gonna
happen
at
our
next
meeting
next
week
and
that's
from
incubation,
so
yeah,
that's
that's
pretty
much.
H
What's
going
on
so
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
around
trying
to
get
more
participation,
you
know
so
reaching
out
to
several
say
not
six
but
other
groups.
You
know
like
the
projects
from
container
runtimes
and
some
other
projects
related
to
how
you
created
standards
for
containers
so
yeah.
That's
that's
what
we
we've
been
up
to.
I
I
One
interesting
thing
that
happened,
which
doesn't
normally
happen,
is
we
we
do
the
presentation.
We
got
a
project
presentation
of
a
project
called
Pro
fika,
which
is
a
storage
streaming
system
and
for
storing
events,
and
that
sort
of
thing-
and
one
thing
which
was
interesting,
was
that
they
were
kind
of
wondering
if
CN
CF
was
the
right
place
for
them.
I
E
A
P
Look
out
from
our
communications
from
us.
Nothing,
that's
come
up
from
this
meeting
though,
but
we're
gonna
be
sending
out
tons
of
us
and
maintainer
circle,
information
and
all
kinds
of
fun
stuff
here
within
the
next
week,
and
we
have
a
why
now
it's
PR
des
and
it's
not
officially
approved
but
contributing
to
MD
we've
got
to
read
me:
we've
got
so
much
Metis
stuff,
yeah,
I
lost
Josh
or
something.
A
Nope,
nothing
from
his
side
last
piece
in
here.
Again,
we've
got
three
minutes
or
so
wanted
to
be
able
to
highlight
the
TOC
survey
results.
This
is
the
first
time
that
we
have
done
a
TOC
survey
and
part
of
it
is
being
able
to
see
like
what
people
are
actually
talking
about.
What
people
are
thinking
around,
how
the
TOC
and
six
are
working
out
and
there's
a
lot
of
details
in
like
the
further
documentation
which
is
at
the
very
end
of
this.
J
A
There
is
definitely
some
feedback
in
there.
The
full
results
are
available
in
here
and
I
knew
that
we
were
going
to
run
out
of
time.
So
I'm
perfectly
happy
to
be
able
to
put
this
as
a
item
on
a
future
agenda.
Cuz
I
know
we
had
a
lot
to
cover
today
and
I.
Think
my
last
question
is:
was
this
helpful?
Should
we
do
this
kind
of
format
again
and
what
else
should
we
be
talking
about.