 Good morning, everyone. We'll get started in just a few minutes to give everyone time to join. There it goes. Howdy, howdy, howdy. We'll give it a few more minutes for folks to be able to come on in. All right, we're three minutes in and I'm seeing some people kind of drop on in as well, so I'll go ahead and get us started. Emily, if you're ready. Yeah. All right. Here, there. We've done all the things. You've made it here. The logistics and agenda. Rock and roll. All 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. So all 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. That being said, let me pull up the issue real quick. 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. 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. We've also talked about succession planning and potential co-chair rotation to avoid as much burnout as possible as well as decrease, 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 and their community's desire as long as it's within the alignment of the group. 61, does anyone have any understanding that that is not what is up for discussion today or did they have any other items that they wanted to add? I will keep an eye on chat, keep rolling Emily. Okay, so there was an initial PR that was filed associated with issue 961 called the Cloud Native Milestones. 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 communities 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. There has been some discussion on the issue as it exists today all on the PR around the milestones and I've done my best to kind of resolve as many of them as I can. Has everyone had a chance to look at those and grab the PR for everyone and post it in chat? 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? Emily, I just joined and I probably missed the 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 the issue describes the topic and kind of calls out into question it asks some great questions but is there a draft of a proposal? For the PR, yes, so for the defining sandbox exit criteria potentially creating milestones to incubation that is in PR number 997 so that 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 although we have not actually gone down the path of actually executing on a sandbox archive but considering the amount of sandbox projects that we have some of them are significantly more active in others while some are just slower growth areas because we're still testing the waters in that particular technology domain but really wanting to identify progress within the sandbox on their capability to achieve maturity and then eventually move on to incubation. Nice, yeah perfect I totally missed that there's a PR linked to the bottom of the issue, yeah, no worries. Actually, I take it back is that I think that's just a reference to a different issue so I don't know that the PR is linked to 961 hence my ignorant question. I will fix the linking. I will do my reading. Any other questions about that? Any other opinions? If we haven't had everyone look at it that's completely understandable I just want to ensure that folks are aware of it if we need to have a discussion on it we can do that on the PR we could do it on the call we can move on to one of the other topics I've posted summaries in the chat. Is it possible to have a working document so that people can actually collaborate on the PR or on the other topics? Well I'm looking at the milestones issue right so I mean if people have suggestions maybe they can add it to the working document before actually I mean they can they could add it to the GitHub PR too but I don't know I mean it just sounds like maybe you know working document might be a better way to just throw people's ideas there. I can certainly take an action to do that. Yeah thank you. I think this looks pretty good. Do you have any like a summary of what this means in general for projects it means like they're going to I mean I'm kind of reading through it this is like the first time I'm reading through it right so the intent behind 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 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 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 it doesn't necessarily mean that the project is a failure it doesn't mean that the project just doesn't work within the foundation it could mean that we're not going to see the level of maturity or it's not going to get the level of adoption that we might reasonably expect from our projects 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 lifecycle 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 many of them are technology or domain specific for a project and it could also be community driven for a project however they are instances of activities that successful projects have undertaken in the past that have set them up for success later was that helpful yep pretty much some setup okay yeah and I think the idea here is just the this is not a like some process that needs to be followed but it's more like guidance correct like some projects may 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 the requirements in different ways Jaffee did you have a comment I saw you come off mute yeah um so I'm I'm thinking for the so the two parts right for the archive of the sandbox projects um have we sent emails specifically specifically to those sandbox project maintainers ask their feedback because that may you know uh impact their you know um 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 start our archive you know um sandbox project they will be surprised so the existing archive process does kind of describe that a little bit from uh 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 yeah yeah that's good I understand I'm thinking you know if this we put this um we merge this PR right um um I think probably it's it's good we asked for their input or their feedback on this I don't know whether we have a I think we should have at least of those party owners right we do but the problem is there's going to be like a thousand of them so I think I would limit down the uh uh the level of uh request that I think I would put in so if you can form what the question is yeah we can do that but understand there's there's a lot oh okay I think the question the question you just asked for their input to give them a heads up say you know we're going to have this you know PR which will be you know may you know relate to your project status may potentially impact your project something like that yeah see actually I think the place to be able to put that is actually the TOC list because that's where everyone's going to be looking so yeah TOC list mailing list we can certainly call that out when we push this for uh the two week public comment but we wanted to socialize this with the tags first for their feedback Justin and Duffy I was wondering if we'd know how much the tags actually interact with the sandbox projects after there's a lot of a lot of sandbox projects now I'm kind of wondering kind of curious if we have any idea how many of them are engaged with the tags now and how many are not I mean I can speak here for app delivery and our experience is usually we see projects showing up usually when before they want to enter sandbox to get some feedback from the tag and like kind of test the waters get some input usually some some guidance and then the next time we usually see them yeah when they apply for incubation and there's very little in between of of interactions I don't know whether it's specific to tag app delivery but this is very much our experience that we usually like they're even leveraging the community or in the engagement model with the tags that much but if I don't take leads here as well maybe their experience yeah yeah for a tag network how do you characterize it precisely or that's our same experience as well yeah I think for tag runtime we reach out to a lot of the projects that have actually apply for sandbox like we look at we just 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 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 maybe it might be good to have some sort of investment some sort of automation that for example like for the annual reviews instead of like manually sending you know requests from annual reviews I'm not really sure if they're actually the projects are keeping track of this but I mean I think from the the CNCF 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 it reminds them that it might be good to engage the tax for you know an update on the project. Ricardo you're actually like touching on something that I was working on for not last week but the week before moving all of the annual reviews over into the landscapes they're available they're visible and people like nowhere to be able to find them. Great great. 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 that we're thinking about. I have two things to add as well one it'd be interesting if we could probably to document in the archiving process is there a is there a mechanism by which they can find their way back out of it or if that's like the archival is the you know like what is that is that the end of the line for that project or is there a way for them to find their way back in this when they resubmit like 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 so that like if this is a storage project then tax storage would have particular milestones that might make sense for a storage project because clearly like the tag security does have milestones that do make sense for the security side of things and I'm wondering if like if there are other tags that have things that would fall within that particular vertical that they represent that they want to include in milestones. 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 been archived can come back and reapply if they're active again just normal process proposal I'll let the tag folks 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 one oh yeah 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 I was about to chime in thanks Amy yeah so I think I think tag contributor strategy also has some milestones that we'd probably want to add in particular around things like like governance and contributor ladders and some of the the things that we would like projects to have in place and I think I think having some of this in the milestones will help people start thinking about it before they get to graduate it 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 tag contributor strategy and talk about what we might need from a milestone perspective but yeah I think that's a really good point 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 see some head nods 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 we can certainly send this out to the TOC mailing list to get some finalization from everyone and then we can move forward with a formal public comment period associated with all of these and get everything merged in within the next two months does that sound reasonable hey sorry I joined late so regarding the milestones is this something that each tag will be responsible for defining what other milestones that was what we were discussing yes okay yeah sure sounds good they don't need to be very robust we can just start with something simple and like wait for the common problems that projects approach you about or common challenge areas that you're seeing with projects as part of their transition through the CNCF lifecycle sure okay any other comments suggestions on this topic Ricardo you came off mute yeah no I was just thinking about the milestones I think that they should be pretty similar between the different tags so I mean there might be a few things here and there that are unique to each tag but in general you know 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 will be great for each one of the tags to chime in but yeah that's just my take on that 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 was 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 on the one hand problems and on the other hand does the product does the project have an idea on how to reach this so whether it's more on the governance side it's more on the adoption side and then like regular review this maybe together with uh with the tag not not review in a sense that we tell them okay did this wrong but rather like have a discussion obviously asked him to work closely with tag contribute the strategy and that is to resolve those issues but this would also help like almost allow the roadmap how to 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 would apply across all tags and all projects pretty much agreed that's certainly something we can look at at least as part of the annual review um 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 not on 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 we will sometimes get answers that say like um 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 um one of the things we do do is like the annual reviews complete is uh send out a note from tag contributor strategy which is basically like inviting them to like hey you've gotten through your annual review come on by um and and that I think has worked fairly well for that particular tag so basically we can add on app delivery questions in there if we need to any other thoughts perspectives recommendations associated with this sorry Amy are the annual reviews available anywhere now you said you are having this landscape which is great so they're always over on the TOC repo always um 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 uh 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 okay um so the next topic that we have on the agenda is around new tag on boarding we recently had the environmental sustainability sustainability tag join us we did have some challenges initially associated with bringing them on board the TOC wanted to explore the viability of it as a working group initially but due to some lack of governance on the TOC repo and lack of clarity and direction we did have some challenges and then converted them over into a tag so for future tags coming on board either converting out of working groups or if there is enough of a community driven activity in a known and well documented and established need for a tag associated with that 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 do you do you have a list of some of the challenges that you ran into um I don't know that we've taken the time to actually write them down um and I know that I personally have not had the time to meet with any of the existing co-chairs of the new tags um to understand how we could have been more supportive with them and I think that's something that I would like to have them come forward and talk about or even with the existing tag co-chairs um where they're experiencing some of the challenges in both the execution and the management of the tags their community their work goals objectives and deliverables that they're looking for so that that's kind of what this is is I know that there were problems I don't know what they all are I'd like to hear from you all I think if the maybe around finding the documentation um how to elect the tag chairs and tag tech leads um 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 import the tag or how to maintain the tag chairs or actually find new tag chairs or or or you know you have like an election for the tag or like it has to go through a TOC where they need to get voted in and that type of stuff right so if it could be you know documented it might be more helpful 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 Birkis 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 Josh and I are and so you know we're thinking a lot about how do we how do we bring new people on board and eventually eventually replace ourselves Josh has been a co-lead for the tag I think possibly since the beginning so for quite a few years now and so I think it's it's always a challenge to bring people on on board and get them productive quickly and 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 yeah I think I agree with that and for example like some folks don't know how long or how much time they need to invest in like meetings or reaching out to projects and that type of thing maybe because everybody has different a different schedule like some some people are doing this on a volunteer volunteer basis and some other folks is like their full-time job and that type of thing so maybe a little bit of guidance on you know how much time you need to spend and what what are the things that independent on you know your day-to-day responsibility is what you could do to contribute I know it's kind of hard to to be because there's a lot of information that you could just put there but you know I think any any any information from experience from from the tax and people working in open source will be helpful that's a good idea from our experience Duffy go ahead I was saying that's a very good idea the summary of what the work is like how do you how do you engage what would it look like to actually do this work if you were to come and be a part of it you know I think from tax 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 I talk to other newer tax as well people like to start out we built this landscape we built this 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 they're immediate concern like in some cases who do you get to write the white paper usually vendors and projects who want to have their view represented there very often you get people and read the white paper who the white people who obviously want to work on it a landscape is what you see actually in 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 you actually start to find that 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 like run all the work within the working group I think that's that's a sweet spot that you all always need to find and I think that's always what you have to cure it and work on like some things are moving faster others are not moving faster like for app delivery we had this situation where we were everybody was like excited about the operator white paper which is still used a lot that was actually a white paper that worked why because a lot of people didn't know how to like properly handle and write that that was good there was another one about air-capped environments there was a little bit of interest then 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 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 tax 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 out there that there's important and valuable information for people and also help those people 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 like to Dawn's 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 so everything that can help on like making this easier I think is going to help the most the curation needs to be done by the TUC chairs and like helping to direct things in the right direction okay this is all great what else 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 this one will probably take a little bit more time 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 tank chairs because I do know that you all have a lot on your plate already any other points of discussion on this particular topic Amy your camera came on and your mic came down I was more like that as people are kind of like you know decloaking and all of that like anything else we need to be able to talk about today yeah Ricardo go ahead no I don't I don't have anything I just my camera just came up decloaking you come out and you're like the maybe I have something but no it feels like we're ready to move on here um okay um so we talked we touched a little bit on the succession planning and go chair rotation burnout concern 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 elevating 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 yeah I think that's some setup lack of contributors and 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 project that you know how to the how to help them get to that next step where they can reach out to other projects in their space and and actually um become part of the the tag leadership okay even even you know basic contributors like for example tag runtime we have like different people join every meeting they're not the same so we don't we have like maybe when Nikita has like been joined in the last maybe two months and 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 so they don't have that constant amount of people I think as opposed to some something like security tag but they get like regulars all the time so it's harder kind of like just groom people to to become the part of the tag leadership like tech leads or co-chairs so I think maybe maybe if we can make it easier for the projects to to engage but it kind of goes back to maybe my suggestion of having something more automated not really sure like automatic emails please join the tag 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 to a wider audience you know that the meeting is happening for example so I think to some extent it might also be too many meetings so I appreciate every type of information that it can consume async because it's already like a lot of meetings that all of us have happening and especially for Europeans where we kind of like even narrower on the time zones that we can work in with the US everything 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 kind of all facing we are interested in those topics but we have to align them not not we the tag chairs but we the people being interested 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 tag chairs the better it gets that's why I think to some extent meetings are not necessarily the best indicator yep I've heard that as well asynchronous progress is is more successful okay and understanding or recognition of the of the reward for such a thing might be helpful to make like if we were to kind of this kind of a wild idea that definitely seems 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 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 to further your career path or whatever like but just some some way of understanding the reward system for this work would be good you know I was going to mention something similar I think I think for coupon for the program committee members there's a year reward so maybe we could come up with some things tomorrow I think you know the cargo the pattern you mentioned about the tag runtime you know some like for some some people drawn for pure time and then disappear and then other other people drawn for another pure time I think that's a very common pattern yeah I'm thinking how we can you know um to keep their um have a way to you know to keep their interest and have them join you know the meetings for longer time and eventually become the you know help with the tech lead or tech chair I'm wondering is there a process in place for people to know how they can become tech chair or tech lead and tech chair like for example take tag runtime as an example do we have one for that yeah this that's what we're talking about here so there's there's just general documentation on how tag chairs are elected and I think Amy chaired the tag transition and that's there's some document and that's the other one that is there but there's a checklist but there's in the timeline really exactly like we would love there to be a timeline which is why we're talking about this now exactly yeah but but I think you know all these points are really good I mean the the reward system is very helpful to like what do they get out of participating to so so people don't know like what what they get out of it um so I and you know for the program committee there's also some some monetary reward but I don't know how that's if that's possible but but but initially I think it would be you know good to have um uh the you know they the gain the gains for from from actually participating in the community right like you get to you get to learn like some of the latest technologies 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 right 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 they will get you know um more um exposure to other technology other projects and uh also if there is a clear document on the ladder of becoming the tech lead tech chair or maybe reach out to them and tell them you know yeah we need people you know to lab for the ladder so they can have a go right then otherwise they may not know yeah how to do how to and then they just join for that that's the same part if they disappear not long term I think that that'll be good okay I think this is a lot of really good feedback on what we can do to potentially incentivize other individuals um to do more not necessarily more work but become more involved more engage collaborate more with the tags and some of the the activities that they're looking to accomplish um Kathy your particular question reminded me of the existing difference between how the TOC repo documents technical lead and co-chair nominations and how that is different than what the tags themselves may look to in their leadership um I know that the tag 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 an exercise to document what does the proposal look like within the tag for someone to come into that um 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 um but potentially including some information within the repo associated with the tags and I don't know if everyone has this from what they are looking for in technical leads or what are their technical leads embody 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 roles at least initially yeah I think that that would be helpful you know if each tag can have that you know so people are aware and then and that may increase you know the participation or for even involvement deep involvement yeah okay um does anyone have any other comments recommendations challenges associated with this topic we've got about 11 minutes and there was one more on the agenda but I'm more than happy to open the floor for other suggestions and topics um 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 um 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 do you feel that they should be consistent across all of the tags to ensure that everyone is empowered for the same level of work and activity so I have a comment about this so I don't personally keep track of all the other tag charters so I'm not really sure if there's something that they have the tag runtime is missing so it will be good to know you know maybe um you have some general general guidelines about tag charters 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 for tag runtime 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 it or any or any need to actually change it but you know we always leave the door open you know for for change if somebody wants to come in and and make any suggestion and change it but but the last two years of two and a half years has been pretty much the same this is a small item that just for tag network I'm I don't think that and I don't know that it needs to be explicitly called out but I don't know that when we defined our charter that we had highlighted maybe the ability for the tag to do a poll um but it's been on occasion that there's been well we wanted to help facilitate information about how particular technologies were used or um 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 a meaning like a poll facilitated through that CNCF staff and sort of uplifted or officiated or whatever the yeah so I'm thinking um 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 ahead no no actually I think yeah that's probably the more proper term yeah to give a more specific example to the extent that it's helpful was 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 out you want to align if I think I'm hearing right when like the you know in articulating here um uh 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 yeah or just a subject yeah although um yes I'm gonna say maybe on like the like how that is all working because I'm not sure what the end user community is doing with the tech radars but as far as the tag being able to do like surveys on them their own absolutely yeah okay yeah it was just yeah I guess I am not being concise it was just more like yeah a survey of some of the same topics just deeper they were like you know because some of the radar surveys can only they're relatively broad and so people have asked for additional info and uh and I was just trying to contribute to the conversation so uh let me be more clear about this if you have actual questions drop a note into service desk we'll take care of you there I would like to you I would also suggest reaching out to um Prashkar in tag security he led some of the tag 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 and doing the survey questions all of that and the success of the responses because we did have challenges in getting a fair amount of responses from community members and adopters nice yeah it was like like much of that that makes a lot of sense that particularly like trying to assess and have metrics around the usefulness of the activities um 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 or 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 here's what's happening in this corner of the the you know cncf ecosystem or what activities it has had and that might be an activity to encourage and kind of like actually to the extent that um tags like tag network will pretty consistently have a an intro and a deep dive at cube cons 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 so yeah along with them along with the pointer as to how to come and contribute how to get involved and I'm seeing a lot of head nods about this Ricardo yeah I think it's uh yeah we prepare for those uh sessions at cube con and all the things that we write up can 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 I'll deliver in it by email or by by something on the website or the cncf website for example so we've got about four minutes left any other ideas recommendations on boosting the discoverability of the work that you all are accomplishing I had a quick question Emily on on the contributions that the tax gives for things like the due diligence for education is this explicit in the charters for all of them or do we keep it somewhere else I don't believe it actually is and that might be worth something that we should explore 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's a kind of generic maybe we are we are not putting them there I think that's what changed right so we have in the past seen a lot of incubation proposals and due diligence documents that we collaborated on but it felt like the stop probably half a year or nine months ago I don't know whether the process was changed overall back then but this is definitely something we saw we have been way more involved in these in the past than we for example right now 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 are coming up aren't directly delivery related um 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 so that's where that's coming from we can we can certainly make those more clear yeah sounds good and that actually reminds me of something else we talked about in 2022 was around um establishing better cadence for projects to reach out to the different tags whether or not it's prior to each um 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 um that was something that we had talked about in the in the past um 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 we've got about go ahead Fasila one quick question so I have put it in the chat window so last time also when I joined the meeting 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 an approximate timeline by which we could get a sponsor to help us with the graduation proposal this is for Istio so I can't commit to a timeline right now I do know that we have several TOC members that are currently assigned for uh 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 um realistically we are kind of working through all of these pieces in here which is why I moved over to the projects to move levels in here um my anticipation is in the waiting list I guess correct and that is in the projects waiting for sponsors in the meeting minutes doc um what I can see from all of this is that like I mean uh we've got a lot of folks on the call who are actually currently working through some due diligence pieces in here with projects uh 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's our list this is where we're working through uh and with that is there any updates for our folks on the um the current list that we've got up here um I know that we've got some folks running out key cloak you were in like Riccardo you're in public comment for like the next two days um but everybody else is voting anything else rising I will say that Falco is getting very close there are some other items that I need to take care of with that and uh 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 I can give a quick update on cook so as well this has been lagging a bit but uh I'll kick it off uh this week yeah I can give an update on the cryo and tita so cryo we uh we have one more interview to conduct we have finished all the other interview uh the the doctor interviews and for tita we're starting to um schedule those interviews with um these uh end users wonderful good updates all thank you and with that we are over time but thank you so much Emily for leading us through the toc check chairs we will see you for this uh next march 21st 21st yes for the next toc check chair meeting thank you all thanks everyone thank you everyone thank you and me thanks always a pleasure to see you all yeah