►
From YouTube: TOC Meeting - May 23, 2023
Description
For more Continuous Delivery Foundation content, check out our blog: https://cd.foundation/blog/
A
A
E
A
A
I
love,
snakes,
I,
have
to
admit
I
love,
bull
snakes
in
particular,
am
I.
I,
have
a
dog
who's,
an
extremely
good
snake
killer,
and
she
puts
this.
She
puts
his
bark
out
and
I
know
immediately.
It's
a
snake
and
I
run
out
there
to
try
to
catch
her
and
she
hasn't
killed
him
like
instantly
and
it
always
breaks.
E
E
E
D
F
A
F
C
A
E
E
C
C
Okay
right
so
I
wanted
to
to
start
the
meeting
today
with
updates
on
our
end
user
representatives
in
the
TOC.
So
I
wanted
to
to
welcome
our
new
members,
the
DC
sanika
from
Apple
Inc
and
Neil
McGonagall
from
Fidelity
Investment
I
saw
Neil
joined
the
meeting
briefly,
but
I
don't
see
him
anymore,
but
yeah
so
just
to
not
put
you
on
the
spot
right
away.
Maybe
that
easy
would
like
to
give
a
short
introduction
about
yourself.
H
Sure,
good
morning
my
name
is
the
DC
senika,
as
mentioned
I
am
with
apple
I.
Do
Spinnaker
I'm
dude,
my
team
works
on
the
open
source
Spinnaker
project,
but
I'm
also
super
interested
in
all
the
work
that
the
CD
Foundation
does
internally
I'm,
pushing
interoperability
at
Apple
and
really
really
excited
about
CD
events
and
all
the
work
that
the
CD
Foundation
does.
H
I
C
That's
great
thanks
thanks
Neil
and
welcome
again
thank
you
to
working
with
you
and
a
big
thanks
to
to
our
former
TSC
members,
user
and
user
representative
Justin
Timberlands
from
McBay
and
ml
mcmart
from
Ericsson
and
yeah
looking
forward
to
continue
working
with
with
both
of
you
as
well
yeah.
So
what
can
welcome
welcome
to
to
the
new
members?
C
Okay,
yeah
moving
forward
a
few
things
on
the
agenda
for
today.
The
first
thing
I
wanted
to
to
discuss
is
Project
representative
elections,
and
then
there
are
a
few
other
items
about
licenses
and
governance
updates,
but
yeah.
If
there
are
other
things
that
you
would
like
to
bring
up,
please
add
them
to
the
agenda,
so
we
can
discuss
them
and
we
can
switch
program
released
so
for
the
project.
Representative
election,
as
you
would
know,
we
have
the
election
process
started
starting
I,
don't
know
Fati.
B
Yeah
so
thanks,
everyone
for
you
know
already,
starting
with
different
things
like
what
registration
and
project
nominations.
As
Andre
said
this,
we
kicked
off
the
election
process
for
this
year's
COC
project
Representatives
on
May
4th,
based
on
conversations
we
had
in
previous
COC
meetings,
and
we
put
this
pull
request
up
there
for
your
review.
So
May
4th
was
the
date
we
kicked
off
the
process
on
May
15th
is
when
we
published
the
eligible
Waters
based
on
the
criteria
we
have
documented
in
the
process.
B
Any
people
who
had
10
or
more
comments
to
any
of
our
projects,
as
well
as
CDF,
are
considered
as
eligible
voters.
In
addition
to
that,
we
also
opened
up
a
form
for
people
register
themselves
or
follow
comment
numbers
as
eligible
waters,
for
that
form
is
available
as
well
and
it
will
be
open
until
May,
26th
and
yesterday
we
create
an
issue
ontoc.
Oh
sorry,
CDF
Foundation
report,
where
the
projects
could
nominate
the
representatives
there
and
each
project
can
nominate
one
candidate
there
and
then
that
nominations
will
close
on
June
5th.
B
So
all
the
projects
we
have
in
the
CDF
nine
of
our
projects
can
nominate
from
under
and
then
once
the
nomination
period
is
closed.
We
will
collect
those
nominations
and
send
the
list
of
final
candidates
on
CDF
to
your
email
list,
as
well
as
on
slack
Channel,
and
once
that
is
done,
we
will
issue
ballots
using
RPA.
B
What
to
everyone
who
is
considered
as
eligible
voters,
plus
anyone
who
put
their
requests
to
be
registered
as
eligible
Waters
and
then
voting
will
be
closed
on
June
26th,
with
announcement
happening
on
June
28th
and
the
term
begins
on
July
1st.
So
that
is
the
timeline
and,
as
you
might
have
noticed,
we
had
a
few
more
comments
on
this
PR,
based
on
when
things
became
available
like
the
watches,
support
registration
form,
as
as
the
nomination
issue
and
I
believe
the
pr
is
finalize
now.
It's
everything
we
need
for
the
election
to
happen
there.
C
Thanks
a
lot
fatty
personally,
I
I
reviewed
the
pr
and
I
approved
it
on
my
site
and
yeah
I
hope
we
we
can
get
some
more
reviews
and
approve
it
and
merge
it
soon.
Ideally,
if
I
don't
know,
if
folks
have
the
chance
to
to
to
see
the
the
pr
yet,
but
maybe
we
can
try
and
give
like
a
end
date
by
when
we
we
should
merge
it.
So
we
we
have
the
pr
merged
in
time
for
for
the
election.
C
F
C
The
charter
defines
a
lot
of
the
policies
associated
with
the
TOC,
but
it
also
gives
us
freedom
as
a
Toc
to
Define
additional
policies
that
can
be
maintained
in
the
TOC
repo.
So
we
don't
need
to
put
them
back
in
in
the
charter,
so
I
Define
them
here
as
part
of
the
TOC
repo,
so
I
propose
them
what
happens
in
case
of
a
leave
of
absence
of
temporary
absence
of
a
TSC
member
for
stepping
down
or
changing
affiliation.
C
So
I
would
appreciate
again
reviews
on
these
I
can't
go
through
what
I
propose
quickly,
if
it
makes
sense,
but
hopefully
I
mean
I,
took
inspiration
from
other
existing
policies
from
Project
like
text
or
no
other
open
source
project,
including
the
details,
the
cncf
project
template
but
yeah.
So
the
idea
is
that
if
any
member
wants
to
take
a
temporary
leave
of
absence,
they
can
be
are
standing
that
is
proposed
for
that
person,
depending
on
on
the
duration
of
the
level
of
absence.
C
So
this
matches
what
we
will
do
in
intact
on.
So
if
the
land
for
the
leaf
is
greater
or
less
than
one-fourth
of
the
total
term.
So
as
a
different
Behavior,
so
if
there
is
less
than
1
4,
then
it
could
be
a
stand-in
nominated.
Otherwise
we
need
a
new
election
and
for
the
stepping
down
case,
I
took
inspiration
from
the
CNC.
C
What
the
cncf
defines
and
that's
basically,
we
can
try
and
avoid
an
election
if
a
member
needs
to
step
down
by
taking
the
next
the
candidate
with
the
next
most
votes
from
previous
selection
for
the
specific
seat,
and
if
that's
not
available,
then
we
we
can
do
an
interaction,
a
special
election.
But
the
idea
is
to
try
to
avoid
running
as
too
many
elections
any.
In
any
case,
the
special
election
will
and
like
someone
that
will
fill
the
the
person
until
the
end
of
their
original
mandate,
so
that
we
can.
C
We
keep
the
elections
aligned
as
it
was
before.
So
if
someone
has
a
two
years
mandate
and
after
seven
months
I,
they
need
to
leave
and
then
the
new
the
new
person
will
take
the
seat
for
the
remaining
one
year
and
five
months
and
in
case
of
change
of
affiliation,
the
the
policy
that
it
proposes
that
unless
there
is
any
specific
issue
like
conflict
identified
by
the
TOC
or
by
the
TOC
member
themselves,
there
is
no
change
required
in
terms
of
Toc.
C
C
D
J
J
C
C
All
right,
then
moving
forward.
Well,
we,
these
are
not
upcoming
events,
but
if
there
are
other
upcoming
events
that
you're
aware
of
feel
free
to
add
them
here
to
their
notes,
that's
useful
for
everyone
to
be
aware:
I,
don't
think
we
we
have
any
project
update
today,
so
I
think
originally
marked
a
screwdriver
presentation
in
May,
but
I
think
it's
not
been
scheduled
yet
so
we'll
probably
postponed
to
June,
but
I
will
check
in
with
Jason
what
his
plans
are.
For
that
just
a
comment.
C
D
C
D
D
D
G
Because
yeah
like
problematic
thing
here,
that
you
can
just
start
with
the
change
copyright
of
any
file,
even
if
it's
a
on
Apache
V2-
and
here
we
saw
this
legal
thing-
is
before
that,
once
there
is
a
line,
for
example,
in
source
code
file,
it's
free
to
use
it's
it's
fully
up
under
the
Apache
V2
license.
So
there
is
no
restriction,
but
still
you
cannot
just
go
ahead
and
change
the
copyright.
C
G
C
D
C
Yeah
I
think
I
I,
don't
think
Brad
meant
to
to
bring
up
like
a
legal
discussion
on
these
I
was
more
like.
In
some
cases
we
copied
the
license
file
and
there
is
a
template
there.
It's
better
to
have
like
a
proper
format
than
some
YY
name
of
copyright
owner
there
yeah
so
I
just
wanted
to
remind
project
to
check
that
when
they
they
set
up
their
licenses,
they
have
a
valid
entry
in
there.
G
D
G
F
J
Yeah
and
I've
been
told,
like
other,
like
we
were
originally
under
the
Pharaoh
license
and
when
we
talked
to
Chris
annasich.
He
said
that
was
fine,
but
the
long
term
we'd
want
to
go
ahead
and
vote
to
change
the
license
over
to
like
Apache
2..
But
other
licenses
like
MIT,
are
valid,
as
well
as
part
of
the
what
the
Linux
Foundation
accepts
so
I'm.
Definitely
on
the
same
page
with
you
Melissa
and
trying
to
figure
out
what
what
they
like
to
see.
B
J
G
Well,
so,
basically
other
auto
ship,
and
there
is
copyright,
which
are
two
completely
different
things
and
even
to
pick
explicitor,
there
are
something
like
12
versions
of
Creative
Commons,
these
different
specifics
and
with
different
requirements,
contribution
to
copyright,
Etc
but
yeah.
Ultimately,
when
we
talk
about
licenses,
we
normally
put
authors
there,
the
literally
we
don't
care
about
copyright
for
the
majority
of
cases.
G
Yeah,
so
first,
if
you
have
Apache
License
V2,
then
it's
better
because
it's
at
least
written
there.
If
you
have
a
contributed,
license
agreement,
it's
written
there
if
you
have
a
mighty
license
and
if
you
don't
have
a
contributive
license
agreement.
There
is
nothing
explicit
about
patents
in
your
project
right
well
for
Jenkins,
for
example.
It's
also
arguably
complicated
because
we
don't
require
everyone
to
assign
CLA.
C
C
Okay,
next
item
I
want
to
bring
up,
so
we
reviewed
the
bet,
the
status
of
the
governance,
documentation
of
the
virus,
project
and
I.
Think,
as
you
see
it's
important
for
us
to
remind
us
to
remind
a
different
project
and
support
them,
if
needed,
to
to
make
sure
that
they
have
good
Open
Source
cover.
Now
it's
documented
and
I
think
the
the
status
is
a
bit
varied
across
it
our
projects.
C
Right
now,
so
in
City
events,
we
we
do
have
a
bootstrap
governance,
but
we
need
to
do
maybe
do
like
a
full
coverage
since
the
project.
Now
it's
been
there
for
poison
time.
So
that's
something
that
you
need
to
do
want
to
see
the
event
project
s.
The
governance.
Documentation
is
pretty
clear
and
extensive,
so
that's
seems
to
be
a
very
good
state
or
Jenkins
X.
C
C
D
C
I
think
contact
inside
as
well
as
we
have
good
governance,
and
also
this
is
one
of
the
criterias
for
graduation,
so
this
documentation
has
been
reviewed
in
depth
at
the
point.
The
Pierce
project
is
similar
to
CD
events.
They
have
a
bootstrap
governance
that
needs
to
be
updated
to
to
a
full
governance
documentation.
C
C
D
D
C
C
D
G
One
thing
to
mention
that,
well
basically
in
the
CNC
of
the
rescncf
attack
contributor
strategy,
also,
there
is
to
do
group
and
inner
Source
Commons.
So
these
are
three
big
entities
so
that
actually
provide
a
lot
of
hints
for
open
source
governance,
so
I
think
for
us.
It
would
be
interesting
at
some
point
to
leave
to
link
their
best
known
practices,
but
honestly,
I,
don't
think
that
there
is
any
need
to
define
something
on
our
own.
The
result
quite
a
lot
of
stuff.
G
C
C
But
there
is
kind
of
limited
support
from
marketing
point
of
view
for
the
project,
but
it's
at
least
it
provides
a
neutral
home
for
the
project
to
be
part
of
the
foundation
and
then,
if
the
project
can
successfully
grow
into
incubating
state,
then
there
will
gain
the
additional
support
from
from
the
foundation
yeah.
So
personally,
I
I
lean
towards
saying
that
this
might
be
beneficial
to
kind
of
increase.
G
G
Well,
basically,
it's
beneficial
for
the
foundation
because
we
didn't
have
projects
in
the
pipeline.
I
mean
something
solid
in
terms
of
the
application,
and
maybe
we
could
take
some
smaller
projects
so,
for
example,
it
updates
CLI.
We
were
talking
about
a
few
other
things
that
would
be
interested
to
go
through
these
stages
and
maybe
get
some
advantages
from
CDF
marketing
engine
and
at
the
same
time
yeah.
It
also
like
they
think
small
library
in
the
foundation
itself.
A
A
C
G
H
H
D
A
This
time
and
I
can
promise
you
as
a
person
who
started
an
open
source
Community.
There
is
nothing
that
when
you
become
a
incubating,
sandbox
or
otherwise
project
that
it
brings
new
contributors
to
your
project,
you
have
to
bring
the
contributors
with
you,
so
the
sandbox
status
is,
you
know,
maybe
in
our
next
call
we
should
review
the
cncf
statuses,
but
I
just
don't
feel
like
at
this
point.
A
Sandbox
is
a
is
a
critical
discussion
for
us
and
we
don't
have
anybody
even
in
the
pipeline.
A
A
J
A
Gonna
have
tons
of
people
running
to
your
project
to
contribute.
You
still
have
to
go
out
and
recruit,
and
you
have
to
find
your
peeps
so
to
speak,
and
I
have
tried.
Recruiting
open
source
communities
directive
was
what
I
really
thought
we
were
going
to
get,
and
the
investor
said:
no,
they
didn't
want
to
move
forward
with
it.
A
Everybody
knows
that
we
just
recruited
red
hat
and
brought
in
enforce
as
a
sub
project,
because
they
only
have
three
people
working
on
the
project
with
the
goal
of
building
their
community
so
that
they
may
be
able
to
get
to
an
incubating
status
with
the
ortilius
community.
Helping
them
do
that
recruitment
so
that
I
would
I
I,
don't
know
what
the
sandbox
status
is
going
to
bring
to
bring
to
our
potential
open
source
communities.
A
A
G
Well,
I
can
always
only
support
you
I
passed
through
projects
through
cncf,
incubating
consent,
books
and
in
basically
good
conscience.
I,
wouldn't
recommend
it
to
any
Community
manager,
but
the
thing
is
so
that
at
least
it
being
a
CNC
of
incubating
projects
in
safe
sandbox
project
is
clear:
brand
I've
been
in
the
CDF
project,
let's
say
as
a
brand.
It's
much
weaker
and.
A
So,
for
me,
that's
what
we
should
be
focusing
on
not
building
a
Sandbox
is
how
do
we
build
a
stronger
brand
and
one
way
to
do
that
is
for
us
to
start
looking
at
how
we
can
work
work
closely
with
supply
chain
and
the
open,
ssf
and
they've
been
very
clear
there
right
now:
they're
not
interested
in
bringing
in
any
open
source
projects,
so
that
may
be
where
we
could
go
find
some
and
and
incubate
some
security
open
source
projects.
So
that's
those
are
my
thoughts.
I
mean
you
know.
A
G
Yeah
so
I
agree
with
you
and
what
it
means
that
we
should
provide
a
way
to
join
directly
the
incubating
status
or
probably
even
the
graduated
status,
for
projects
that
are
really
established.
But
sandbox
could
be
your
open
for
something
like
a
project
where
two
or
three
maintenance
a
team
care
visit
and
want
to
get
some
affiliation
and
to
get
engaged
so
that
wouldn't
be
even
considered
as
sandbox
for
cncf
and
for
other
things.
G
G
A
J
A
C
Okay,
great
thanks,
I,
think
good
discussion
on
these,
so
I
I
things
that
I
gathered
as
actions
I
think
we
should
review
schedule
for
the
next
meeting
discussion
about
a
review
for
the
bar
or
incubating
what
it
means
to
be
an
incubating
project
in
terms
of
benefit
statement
you
mentioned
Steve,
yeah,
I,
think
we
we
had
some
work,
we
started
and
also
updating
our
project
benefits
and
I.
Think
yeah.
We
should.
C
We
should
continue
on
that
and
once
that's
ready,
we
can
bring
it
to
to
this
group,
so
that
also
helps
us
as
an
input
and
also
we
should
reach
out
to
projects
in
the
security
area
or
in
the
open
SSL.
Since
the
open
ssf
is
not
updating.
Pro
is
not
accepting
new
projects,
so
yeah,
so
I
can
schedule
the
first
one
for
the
next
meeting.
So
we
can
discuss
about
that.
I.
Think
myself
and
Melissa.
C
We
started
working
on
on
the
benefits,
but
it
kind
of
got
on
hold
because
of
all
the
yeah
conferences
and,
and
everything
very
well
quite
pretty
busy.
But
we
should
resume
on
that
and
if
anyone
is
interested
in
collaborating
as
well,
let
us
know
and
for
the
third
one
Tracy
do
you
have
any
recommendation
on
how
to
act
on
that?
We
should
just
reach
out
to
the.
A
You
know
something
that
has
to
be
automated
through
some
kind
of
a
workflow
even
generating
s-bombs
are
a
key
part
of
the
workflow
and
that's
pretty
basic
stuff,
so
I
feel
like
we
should
be
having
a
discussion
with
them
about
projects
and,
if
they're
planning,
on
starting
projects
and
if
they're
not,
could
you
know,
we
would
like
to
grab
those
projects.
So
if
they
have
projects
coming
to
them,
like
Persia
Persia,
pitched
really
hard,
and
they
were
not
ready
they,
and
at
that
time
they
said
that
they
were.