►
From YouTube: CDF - TOC Meeting 2021-03-16
Description
For more Continuous Delivery Foundation content, check out our blog: https://cd.foundation/blog/
A
A
C
D
C
E
C
D
G
G
G
G
G
However,
sponsorship
sales
are
continuing
to
be
very
strong
right
now
we
have
out
for
signature
or
already
signed
220
220
000
out
of
our
200
000
goal,
and
we
expect
that
to
continue
growing
as
well,
because,
like
we
mentioned
spinnaker
summit
and
gap
summit
just
launch,
and
we
also
have
some
sponsorship
opportunities
around
there
as
well,
so
diamond
and
platinum
are
sold
out.
I've
got
two
gold
and
one
silver
left
and
then
a
bunch
of
add-ons
for
for
spinnaker
summit
and
get
up
summit.
G
E
H
C
B
Yeah
referencing
blog
post.
I
think
we
have
nominations
closing
tomorrow
and
then
provided
we
we're
satisfied.
We've
got
some
good
nominations,
then
we'll
go
ahead
with
voting,
which
will
be
for
run
for
two
weeks
and
the
voting
will
be
done
from
march
17
to
march
30th.
Anyone
is
eligible
to
run
for
these
seats.
B
E
E
B
C
I
guess
it
just
yeah
rephrase
that
restate
it
back
yeah,
so
a
big
portion
of
the
talk
will
still
be
representing
projects
that
just
won't
be.
You
know
direct
denominations
from
each
project,
we're
already
at
the
cap
right
now,
so
we
have
to
figure
out
what
to
do
for
the
next
project.
Anyway,
there
are
six
projects
and
the
charter
says:
there's
six
seats,
four
projects.
So
what
happens
to
project
seven
so
yeah?
C
E
C
So
yeah
that
would
be
one
option.
We
could
grow
the
size
of
the
talk.
That's
not
coupled
to
cdf
member
companies,
though
we
could
just
grow
it
forever,
one
new
seat
per
project,
so
we're
keeping
the
size.
I
think
the
current
proposal
keeps
the
size
at
nine,
nine
or
seven
a
camera.
It
keeps
the
size
at
nine
and
sets
aside
a
certain
number
four
projects,
and
then
people
interested
from
projects
will
be
able
to
be
nominated
and
run
and
fill
those
seats.
C
C
D
G
D
D
I
know
that
the
jenkins
group
does
it.
I
could
have
sworn
that
ortelius
folks
had
mumbled
something
about
this,
and
so
I
wasn't
sure
who
all
is
here
today
but
wanted
to.
We've
got
jethan
some
other
folks.
If,
if
projects
are
interested
in
also
participating
in
season
of
docs,
we
can,
I
would
help
you
be
happy
to
help
organize
that
I
believe
we've
got
another
week
and
a
half
or
so
before
the
deadline
to
get
the
organization
registered
and,
of
course,
obviously,
tracy
and
dan.
B
E
E
Application
organization
profile
so
pretty
much
like
in
google
seasonal
as
a
google
summer
of
code,
they
changed
the
prop
process
for
g-sort
a
bit
this
year,
so
where
they
don't
have
a
side.
Instead
of
that,
everything
is
driven
by
google
forms
and
emails,
but
in
principle
the
application
is
the
same.
G
D
E
D
F
F
So
the
question
was:
what
is
the
preferred
license
for
not
only
like
documentation
and
types
of,
I
wouldn't
say
for
lack
of
a
better
specs
or
standards
that
we
should
be
using
for
the
event
sig
and
then
also
we
are
for
seeing
some
coding
as
well
coming
out
of
the
event
sig.
So
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
using
a
correct
license.
I
thought
it
was
apache.
2
is
one
of
the
preferred
ones
by
the
linux
foundation,
but
just
want
to
get
some
input.
C
B
C
Yeah,
so
we
don't
have
any
policy
in
the
cdf
projects
could
have
their
own
policy
further,
restricting
it
if
they
wanted
to,
but
you
don't
have
that,
otherwise,
you
wouldn't
be
asking,
and
so
the
lf
policy
the
umbrella
one.
It's
just
any
osi
approved
open
source
license.
If
you
don't
want
to
read
and
learn
about
all
of
them,
all
the
rest
of
the
projects
have
seemed
to
chose
an
apache
too
and
then
creative
common
one
of
the
creative
commons
families
for
docs.
C
I
think
specifications
and
data
are
a
different
category
too,
to
complicate
things
further.
So
if
the
event
sig
is
going
to
produce
formal
specifications
or
standards,
we
should
probably
chat
with
lf
council
about
what
to
do
with
those.
I
don't
know
the
answer,
but
we
could
get
you
somebody
to
help
yeah.
F
C
Like
you
said
it
can
get
complicated,
pretty
quick,
yeah
and
I'll
just
reiterate:
there's
a
big
difference
between
the
words
specification
and
standard
that
I
think
a
lot
of
us
gloss
over.
So
if
you
don't
know
like
which
standards
again,
I
shouldn't
be
pretending
to
be
a
lawyer,
but
I
think
my
rule
of
thumb
is,
if
you
don't,
if
you
don't
plan
on
actually
submitting
this
to
a
formal
standards
body
like
iso
or
something
like
that,
use
the
lowercase
s
specification.
H
F
H
B
B
Yeah,
I
I
think
what
we
might
need
to
think
about
is.
If
there
is
a
specific
code
element,
we
might
want
to
put
it
under
a
banner
of
a
like
a
specific
project
or
a
specific
output,
and
not
necessarily
tied
directly
to
the
event
sig.
In
the
same
way
where
we
have
a
repo
at
the
moment,
which
is
just
you
know,
meeting
information
and
general
things,
so
it
might
be
when
it
kind
of
the
artifacts
start
to
become
significant.
B
H
C
Yeah
so
yeah
all
that
stuff.
That's
part
of
the
scenes
you
have
the
lowercase
s,
specifications,
the
only
one
that
is
more
on
the
standard
side
that
you
might
know
of
just
some
other
examples
is
like
the
oci
stuff.
That's
why
that's
the
whole
separate
entity
from
the
cncf
that
don't
even
actually
have
formal
standards
yet,
but
they're
set
up
so
that
they
could
propose
those
oci
things
as
standards
if
they
need
to.
H
C
E
E
E
C
C
C
B
B
E
B
E
B
Yeah
yeah,
let
me
get
back
to
you
on
that
this.
A
few
background
things
we
haven't
been
able
to
prioritize
yet-
and
I
know
like
cncf-
is
doing
some
interesting
thing
around
sponsored
cloud
credits.
So
I've
been
tracking
that
program
to
see
if
it's
something
we
can
replicate
in
cdf
but
yeah.
I
just
just
haven't.
D
That,
on
a
related
note,
it
reminds
me
of
something
that
came
up
around
gsoc,
which
was
what
is
the
expectation
as
far
as
who
is
providing.
You
know
the
funding
essentially
for
projects
at
the
moment
it
seems
a
little
bit
unclear
and
I
think
we're
trying
to
default
to
the
projects
need
to
figure
it
out,
but
is
that
the
official
party
line
that
we
should
be
communicating.
B
Yeah,
unfortunately,
we
haven't
sort
of
found
something
that
works
smoothly
and
we
we
had
this
last
year.
I
don't
know
if
it
was
without
richie
or
g
sock,
where
I
I
think
dan
lawrence
actually
helped
out
with
some
of
the
students
needs,
but
we
don't
have
a
yeah
a
formalized
way
to
to
get
that
set
up.
Ideally,
we
would
have
something
longer
term,
but
we're
just
not
there
yet.
B
D
C
E
E
E
B
Come
on
now,
oh,
I
had
one
quick
other
thing.
I
just
wanted
to
congratulate
the
events
sig
folks.
We
just
got
the
announcement
out
today
about
that
group
and
yeah.
It
was
a
another
great
kind
of
team
effort
with
lots
of
comment,
quotes
and
testimonials
from
members.
I'm
just
gonna
stick
that
in
here,
but
yeah.
I
thought
just
take
another
moment
to
to
celebrate
this.
This
really
great
effort
and
just
being
at
the
meeting
on
monday,
a
lot
of
energy
there,
a
lot
of
pr's
and
discussions
flying
around
so
yeah.
B
E
E
F
B
You
know
focused
on
the
interoperability
side
of.
Is
this
something
that
we
can
help
used
to
push
for
interoperability,
and
what
integrations
can
we
do?
I
think
techton
already
works
with
it,
but
they'd
be
interested
in
other
projects,
taking
a
look
and
and
providing
integrations
or
working
with
them
to
to
submit
pull
requests.
So
yeah
a
pretty
hot
topic
that
I
think
we're
discussing
in
lots
of
different
parts
of
cdf
sent
me
at
the
end
user
console
as
well.