 Hello, this is our regular Jenkins governance meeting. This is the second time we do it in Zoom. Usually we do it in RC, but we are testing other communication channels. Today is May 6th, and we have six Jenkins contributors on the call. I'll share my screen to show the agenda. Okay, so we have a number of regular topics, including commutes, and there was a number of approval requests regarding other programs. So I suggest we just go through the entire agenda, unless there are other topics to be added. Okay, and the first item for us is LCS baseline selection and the reporting process. Oliver, would you like to speak about that? Yeah, sure, why not? So there's a poor request. Let me see if I can put it into the document. We have switched to the new approach lately. So there is a poor request link as soon as I find the agenda, pasting it right there. So there is a poor request when we have done all the backports that are currently planned for to be backported in this line. Is there a reception of folks seems to be good? Jesse's got some good points, so I've adjusted that. There's a couple of things that haven't been reported into the last one, therefore, into the whole line. So this is something I'm happy with. I just noticed that there are tests failing, so I would have to look at that and see where that goes. But this is something that I'm happy and there appears to be a consensus about that. So I suggest that we would check whether we are okay with what's in, what's out, make the decision as a part of this document and then we can follow up and iron out the failing test for whatever reason. And I guess we're, I mean, unless there are objections, I would be pushing it out as a release candidate tomorrow. I think it's perfectly fine. If you get a little bit fixed. Sorry, I didn't review it yet, but it looks good overall. So all the major changes which were marked are included. And we don't have anything critical. Oh, yes. I guess this is quite, quite dense. So very briefly there was quite of, you know, several isolated changes. They were mostly back ported. There were the one with the breadcrumbs and header that's fairly recent, so it wasn't back ported. And there was also the part with basically everything around the read-only configuration screens that was back ported. Yeah, that's great. Also we have one fix for Jinx configuration as code plugin, especially for users who are aligned with Rubyhooks. Yeah, we hit it at least once in production. So it would be really nice. And yeah, always the web sockets fixes. So thanks for doing that. Yeah, we'll be deploying a database on my instance as soon as the office is out, okay? Any other comments, feedback? So my question was more related to the LTS baseline selection. Oliver, is that settled on 2.235? The back porting, I think the process is working great. That feels really good to me. And delighted that Jesse detected the one gap that he found. That's really good. Back, the LTS selection, you're okay with 2.235 or is that selection process still in play? Is that decision not yet final? All right, yeah, that's a good point. We had a tendency to close this on these meetings, so I'm quite not sure if we're folding that or not. Yeah, I suggest we ironed out that in the mailing thread as we go, I guess it was suggested a couple of time, I just failed to actually do that. So yeah, I'm okay with the selection based on what we discussed in the last time. From what I see in the developer mailing list, everybody's basically on board. So it's 2.34 or 35. I think that if you're also on board with it, you can just say that it's a decision. Yeah, I've been, and I've put 2.235 into my environment for immediate tests, trying to expose it to my normal use, assuming that it was going to be chosen. No surprises yet, but I'll keep testing. And I think 2.35 is much better than 2.34 because we have a fix for the warnings plug-in and the new user interface. So it would be helpful if we have the 3.5 and not 3.4. I agree. Yeah, no objection. I mean, one of the critical fixes in 3.5 definitely have to be back ported, the breadcrumbs one. But yeah, no objection for me. Obviously, you're making the decision, Oliver. You're preparing this version. Yeah, just above this decision, probably with it. So I decided that we go with 2.35, then. I need to enjoy the feeling, right? Well, I definitely enjoy that. Yeah, we can finally communicate this decision. And yeah, thanks a lot for that. Okay, anything else about the baseline and the porting? I think I'm done except for that, so thank you very much for all that. And Daniel, they both contributed a lot to the last update of the process. It was very, very valuable. We revived it after a couple of years. So that was definitely, definitely good. And basically everyone who puts time into testing and reviewing this port request. So it's very appreciated. I mean, it turns out that a single pair of eyes can make many mistakes, especially because of my eyes. So this is definitely crucial. Thank you. And I'm delighted with the process you're using. Thank you very much. That's really great, Oliver. Thank you. Well, keeping the process going. Thanks, guys. Yeah, sorry, that was all for me, sorry. Yeah, that's perfectly fine. And yeah, we have six weeks until this LCS is out. So more time for testing. Okay. So next subject is Google Summer of Code. So we have already discussed it at a couple of meetings. But we had all the projects announced. So this year we will have seven projects. Six will focus on Jenkins. One will focus on Jenkins X. So Jenkins projects include custom Jenkins distribution and build service. The topic we have really discussed at the Contributor Summit in Brussels in February. Then external fingerprint storage, continuation of our pluggable storage stories, give plugin performance improvements, GitHub checks API for Jenkins plugins. Uli, who is on the call, he's a deep mentor in this project. Also machine learning plugins for data science and Windows services, this YAML configuration support. So these are six projects. We have already added these six projects to the Jenkins roadmap because all of them have been considered important. I'm not sure whether the website has already been updated because I merged this change maybe 15 minutes ago. Apparently not. But once the build completes, we will have these items on the roadmap as well as other projects like, for example, REST API specification generator on future topics because we would like to eventually have them. So hopefully by the end of this meeting we will have a new roadmap here. And yeah, today we had a welcome meeting with all JSOC students and mentors. So I will publish a recording for tonight and everybody is welcome to watch it if you want to see more details. Any comments, questions? I guess not. Okay, then let's roll forward. So roadmap updates. For roadmap, I guess roadmap still hasn't been updated yet. There were some look and feel improvements. I'm also working on a filtering of the stories. Content-wise, we have added JSOC stories to the roadmap. We have also updated marketing and outreach programs. So for example, here now we have new Jenkins Online Meetup platform, which is basically released. Jenkins is the way program, which has been announced last week. And yeah, we've already got a lot of stories. So Alisa, if you would like to briefly share the status, it would be nice. Yeah, we have it later today anyway, right? Yeah. Okay. Thanks, Oleg. So just to give some contact. So last week we posted this blog to announce the initiative that we are collecting Jenkins user stories. So basically in the past we, we, there was some bad blogging or blogs that does not put Jenkins in a very good light. And so then the thinking behind this initiative is that, to combat that negativity that we would showcase all the wonderful things that people are doing with Jenkins. And the other thing we wanted to do was hoping that these stories will inspire people to, you know, make or learn from these stories. So, so that's the context of this, this initiative. So so far before the, before we rolled out this initiative, we, we worked on about six user stories and two case studies. And since the release of this blog, which was last Wednesday, so so far we have received 20 new submissions. So 20 new user stories. And then I think there's about another 20 that's still being in the works, but they haven't completed. So what we will do is take those stories, turn them into user stories. And then for stories that really compelling, we want to turn them into an actual case study. So a user story is an abbreviated version of a case study. So we want to continue this program for as long as we can. So my plan is to keep this going for, for this whole year and see what we can get. And then, you know, from that point on, that there's going to be a ton of good content that we, we can make available to the community. So we'll figure out what we will do next, but right now we're, we just want to collect as many of these stories as possible. So then that leads to Mark's question that the next question on the agenda is about the Jumbotron. So I'll leave that to Mark. Yeah. I think we can get there, maybe in a few minutes. So if you can show the road map. Okay. Thanks for the overview. So other thing we added is basically a new online meta platform. So basically it's a tooling for Jenkins online meetups. I plan to post a blog post, but now we are capable of running well, basically any number of meetups we can support. Thanks for continuing to continuously refundation for sponsorship. And we have already practiced this platform with Jenkins and Kubernetes online meetups. So we had two meetups is hundreds of participants. And we plan another one to next Monday. And we will have more meetups announced. So these stories are completed. Well, completed at least there. There is also we started this discussion about Jenkins UI UX hackathon. So it also happens within the Jenkins is the way program. Well, at least we try to align because of the time frames overlap. And also we have an opportunity to facilitate user stories about user experience. And also UI changes and documentation improvements. So I think that it could be a good program. So it's under the discussion. Tomorrow we will have a discussion at the focus and outreach meeting, but generally it goes well. And yeah, there is a lot of other stories, but everything else has been added before. And we applied to Google season of dogs to start on 20. So in one week, we should have results about that. And now we are waiting. I'll try to refresh the road map. Yeah. So once a GSOC changes integrated, we should have a lot of additional items here for tool and service integration section. And right now it's the weakest section. I would say at the same time, it's the most important one because this people, what people expect from Jenkins. So if anybody has any ideas about projects and initiatives, we could add there. This submit your pull request because it would be really helpful to grow this section right now. It should be around six seconds there after adding GSOC questions, comments. Sounds good. Just one question about Jenkins is the way and a GSOC, I guess, simultaneously. GSOC has seven projects inside including Jenkins X. And my understanding Jenkins X started a sub project for Jenkins, but yesterday there was a webinar by Jenkins X maintainers. They mentioned it has nothing to Jenkins. Jenkins X version. So I wonder how it is a relationship of Jenkins X to the Jenkins is the way. If there is a good story on Jenkins X, we will include it in Jenkins X away for now. If there is a good story on the user story on Jenkins X, we'll definitely take it as well. We won't say no to that. Yeah, maybe on different platform. I guess it's subject for discussion of when it happens, but definitely if we get a story, we'll try to get it published somewhere. Okay. And I think we can just switch to Jenkins X the way then. So I guess we have two items to discuss today. It's whether you put it on Jumbotron and whether you want to change the Twitter avatar. So, Mark, would you like to speak about the test? Sure. So the concept there is that on the Jenkins.io site, we have a series of scrolling panels which appear right now, CD Foundation, and then GSOC 2020. And then there's one more panel currently welcoming people to contribute. The welcome to contribute and CDF panels are pretty much there all the time and should remain. The GSOC announcement fits very well for the timeline right now. Exactly. What we'd like to do is add one more panel, which is an invitation to join Jenkins is the way for people to submit their stories. So instead of three panels visible here, there would be four. One of the reasons for bringing it to governance is that that makes this the initiative for Jenkins is the way very, very visible. We felt like the governance board should at least make a willing choice. So in this case, yes, this is a good thing to do. Yes. I think it's a good idea. It makes it really visible for instance, everybody sees now what Jenkins can be used for. That's really a good idea, I think. And I agree it's wonderful. What do you think? Yeah, so plus one for me as well. Oleg and, and I think Alyssa had already expressed her plus one previously. Yeah, yeah. Okay. So I'm just opening developer main increased. We got something back here. So plus ones from Tracy lot. Marky, but he's the lead team. So yeah, no minus ones. Yeah, I would say that it's approved with somebody's against. Great. So I'll go ahead. I've got a, I've got a double check that the pull request is safe and safe. I've got a couple of things. There was a, there was a correction that Tim Jacome had detected needed to be made for that might be possible. So I'll let me do one double check on that before it gets merged. Okay. Thank you, Mark. And the way I'll confirm that I've finished that is actually remove the on hold. Right now it's, it's labeled on hold to remind people don't merge this until we get governance approval. Do you have a preview of the jumbo from there? There is one. Yeah. It's inside the pull request. Yeah. We have to make a pull request on a daily basis now. Yeah. First of all, programs. So he's a current draft for the jumbo throne. We can put spinners from jinks users around the world. Short case and how they're building your phone can make it great software is Jenkins. And what about hardware? Yes, yes, you're right. Sorry, I didn't cover everything. I just used, I took the verbiage from their site initially. So that's fair, fair point. What about hardware? Good. So I will start the new program about hardware and offer Jenkins t-shirts, right? Clearly. Clearly Oleg is from the platform. He's apparently been involved with hardware before. That's a good thing. And to cover the previous discussion, I'm even doctor. Yes, yes. Exactly. Yeah. We have two doctors in this, in this meeting. That's great. Okay. Yeah. So yeah, thanks to Mark for doing that. And let's keep it pushing. Another subject about Jenkins of the way again is Twitter. So if you look at our Twitter, Well, actually, we are still using Jenkins to the zero image there. Yeah. So yeah, this image is four years old or so, like Jenkins too. So I guess it's definitely time to change the image to something. And the proposal from Alisa was to use Jenkins in the way image there. So Oleg for, for the benefit of the people on the call, could you open the artwork page so that we could see the image? I want to be sure that, that, that people actually see the, the image that's proposed. I think it's. There it is. Right. Yes. Now, one of the requests from the community was, Hey, where's the SVG version of this? And I don't think we have an SVG. So if we need a high resolution version, it is not as high resolution as some of the other SVG formatted versions that are there. Mark, I think I sent you a high res version. Yeah, you said a high res EPS EPS doesn't, doesn't have the same attribute that SVG does the SVG is nearly infinitely scalable. It. Okay. Let me ask for that. Anyway, we don't need a vector for Twitter. No, we don't. Okay. Great. Yeah. So we can technically replace it by existing image. So it's rather a matter of feedback. No, we appreciate the opinions about it. Yeah, I'm plus one for the replacement. I think it's a, it's a good update. Yeah, we could also at a hashtag here, for example, Jenkins that the way on, on the laptop account name. But yeah, it's again, a matter of how visible this company should be and how far we want to go. So plus one for me as well. And like I said, I'm hoping for us to continue to collect stories till the end of this year. I don't think that we will keep this image until the end of the year, but yeah, maybe one month or so would be reasonable. Would appreciate the opinions. And I agree wholeheartedly that it's time to replace that avatar image with something else. I like your notion of a one month, one month on Jenkins is the way and then we could revert it even to something simpler or to the regular Jenkins logo. Yeah, I think regular Jenkins logo by default, unless we have something else. Right. Jenkins 2.0 is a while ago. We're a nice long live project, but that's, that's a long time ago. Okay. So, personally, I rather abstain in this story, but yeah. So, Alisa Marker plus one, right? Yes, plus one from me. Opinions. Yeah, I don't use Twitter, but I'm okay with it. Yeah, the same. Yeah. Oliver, should we wait for your feedback? Oops, I'm muted. Sorry. Yeah, I like the idea. Okay. So I guess we have a decision now. Do we have something in the mailing list? It went to advocacy and outreach. So plus one from Marky here. So I guess it's approved. So one month. So one problem here is about the implementation because currently the account is managed by Tyler. I have access, for example, to Twitter. So I can post this same for Mark, for Marky, for Tracy. But we need someone to really change the logo. So I guess it would be you, Alisa, who is about to reach out to Tyler. Okay. Thank you. Thank you too. So anything else about Jenkins of the way? That's it for me. Okay. Thank you. So I have a subject about governance roadmap. I started submitting some pull requests. For example, here I put a suggestion to it. Well, obviously to southern 20 governance, but not certain elections to the roadmap. You have to do it according to our process. And the second item I suggest to put to the agenda. To me, it's called infrastructure initiative compliance. So core infrastructure initiative is a. It's a security certification, which is suggested by links foundation. And the previous delivery foundation actively adopts that. So what the current infrastructure initiative membership one blocks firstly access to targeted as my security sponsorship programs like security, audit, et cetera. Also access to tools. And moreover, currently CI becomes a part of. Continuous delivery foundation requirements to graduated CDF projects. So I think it would be a good thing for us to be officially certified as core infrastructure initiative. There is some information about this best practices or research program, which defines the requirements. And the results. The current certification. I started an experiment in January. So we are currently at 80% of the checklist. So there are two major areas we need to address. First is to introduce a Jenkins code triage team, which makes sense in any case. And which was one of the follow-ups at our respect. We had related to LCS in the previous baseline. And another is security, but we mostly need to work with security team to clean up the questionnaire there and to ensure that they're all set because I didn't really spend too much time on this section. So we are close to completion, in my opinion, and it would be really beneficial to the project. So I would suggest it to the roadmap. Would everyone be fine with that? Yes. Plus one for me. Yes, absolutely. Yeah. So we have plus one from Alex. Do you think it's okay? Yes, I'm plus one. Yeah, sorry, I'm practically involved with the roadmap discussion. So I guess I will abstain for this one. So there is no impact on the LCS process in the CI certification. The only, sorry, the only impact is triage of issues, which may help LCS for sure. Okay. So if everyone agrees, I will just measure that. Also, there are two other political requests. One is about board elections. Another one is a court of conduct candidates, which is not ready really yet. So I will probably postpone it. And for board elections basically it's just restructuring of the patients are working. So then if everybody is finding this public best, I suggest to take a look at synchronously. If you have some time, I would like to measure that. This is just the preparation for the roadmap as well. I think it's for synchronous review, so that we didn't spend too much time in the meeting. There is no question. It's about the roadmap and these items. I would move a bit to governance documentation. Is it fine with everybody? Sounds good. Okay. So we have two pages. Well, actually you have a little more pages, but there are two major ones, which are currently on Viki. One is approved trademark usage. And here for example, we have basically a history of previous approvals. And this history is not complete because for example, one month ago I asked for trademark usage approval for Jenkins rule. And I cannot really edit here because it's a protected page. And at the time we agreed that I would follow up and to see how we could move it to Jenkins. And it is basically the today's agenda topic. The other similar page is commercial support, which leaves companies providing various kinds of commercial support for Jenkins. Again, this page, well, probably it's not protected, but definitely it's something which would make sense to move to the Jenkins.io website, maybe after some cleanup. So in order to do that, we need to have a process how we manage that because Jenkins.io is basically a shared resource. And last week as a part of Jenkins.io copy editor selling and boarding, we created a new maintainer guide. And this maintainer guide explicitly documents what is the owner's obstruction and all documents under the project are explicitly managed by the governance board. So my suggestion would be to say that this maintainer guide is enough to say that the resource is protected well enough and that we can adjust all these pages to Jenkins.io without inviting new repositories and other things. So my proposal would be basically to move for these pages to Jenkins.io so that they would appear on the project section. So it's here. Now we have governance documentation, the code of conduct, various board elections and also some team descriptions. The whole hosting team is documented here right now just because I didn't find a better place. And yeah, I suggest to basically move trademark information there and other things. So what do you think about that? I think it's the right approach. I think it's comparable level of import of value that we need those pages on Jenkins.io and we need them under control of the governance board. And I think using the code owner's technique that you've used on Jenkins.io is sufficient and gives us a good history. Yeah, so speaking of codonas, we have two boards. One is basically GitHub. We have codonas and if there is any page within the project scope, governance board will be automatically requested. So that we will get notifications so that if there is a pull request suggested. Also, we have autolabular, et cetera. So all pull requests, we should go against governance documentation. Again, they will have governance label assigned to them. So you can subscribe to this label so you can just have a query and access this pull request. Are you aware of any cases where we've got a governance document, Oleg, that's not explicitly, a governance document on Jenkins.io that's not explicitly controlled by codonas? Well, if we discover such a document, we will just add it here. Okay, good. So there's a process. If there's a gap detected, we just insert it into this definition file. Yeah, this process is quite simple. Just submit a pull request. Great. Okay. Thank you. So, yeah, I just wanted to keep the things simple. So if everybody is fine with it, I will just put the documentation there. Okay. And you can beg. I think it's a good idea. So plus one, but that's after for, so for the support page, Oleg, that that's after we update that, right? Well, part of the transition is to bring it in and it's updated in the transition process. I was assuming Oleg, we can't alter the, the existing read only thing on wiki.jenkins.io. So commercial support, theoretically, I and Olivier have access to that. Maybe Mark as well. Well, because we got advanced access to Jenkins week as a part of the documentation immigration story. But common contributors don't have access to this page. So for example, if let's say it's forest technologies, well, this company doesn't really exist anymore. It was acquired. If they want to modify this page, they cannot. Right. So, yeah, by moving to Jenkins, I will basically make it possible again to at least submit updates. Maybe we need to build this page from scratch because, well, I know for sure that some companies are around that some would be willing to update. About some of them, I have no idea. But yeah, we could at least start that process. And for me, a trademark is probably more important. Got it. Any other words? Yes, plus one. Yes. So I will just submit a pull request then. And if there are more votes, for example, from Alex, you can call that the decision is made. So as a target, three board member approvals. Yeah. And actually, that's it from the agenda. Again, same question as we had before. Do you feel that this format is okay? Or do we want to switch back to IRC? I like it to see you. At least. Wow. A couple of people I never seen. So Oliver, for instance, I never seen these. So it's really nice to see. Yeah, unfortunately for me, we a bit harder to do it is on a regular basis. So, but I guess I see the shift towards, towards, you know, I think channels for at least the areas where I'm active. So yeah, I probably won't be able to attend as often, but I'm not that much on the governance side anyway. Yeah. So we can try to make this call even more synchronous. I believe that it still makes sense to have regular meetings. Just for some discussions in CUP, celebrating wins in the GENTIS project. But yeah, we should move forward in making the processing channels as much as possible. Yeah. Oh yeah, I wasn't objecting to that. What I was referring to specifically was the LTS or baseline selection and the, and the reviewing of the, of the changes, which we essentially sort of moved out of these meetings. Unless there's a special need. Right. And that the LTS baseline selection using its current process doesn't, if I remember correctly, doesn't actually have to come to cover governance. It's entirely your call, Oliver and that's great. I actually have to be here for that. That's, I just brought it here because you've met benefit that you're here. Thanks. Oh yeah, for sure. And sorry, it's just the habit that haven't vanished yet. We've been doing it for years this way and we changed the process and even I failed to follow it. So that's where we are. Well, we continuously changed the processes now. So, and hopefully we improve overall. So yeah, thanks a lot for driving the LTS changes. So, I think that it's perfectly fine to do tensing mode. And we have a deep discussions in the media please. I'm perfectly fine with how it happens. Okay. But yeah, it would be great to communicate the decision, the developer, my interest because some users start asking, what is the decision on Wednesday. Historically, we have announced it on Thursday. Yeah, if you could communicate it will be great. Okay. Anything else to discuss today. So the next meeting is May 20. I guess nothing is really working this meeting from happening on this date. So, I think we can just keep the usual schedule. So yeah, thank you for your time. And we can follow up to see the developer my lengthiest or in other channels. Thank you. Thank you everybody. Thank you guys. Bye bye.