 Hello, Lois, can you hear me? Yes, I can hear you. Sorry. Ah, now people are showing up. So Harry, I can hear you now. I couldn't hear and see anybody right before that one. So everybody, please add yourself again to the meeting notes. Let me just post them here after a minute chat momentarily. So let's maybe wait a couple more minutes and see what more people are joining for the meeting today. OK, since we have not a lot of people joining today, Harry, I thought that you typed some updates in there. So let's just briefly go over the updates here and this is then most likely going to be a quick meeting. And I'll try to have some more complete attendance the next time, especially from the working group checks to have more updates. OK, so on the left, oh, just as we say. We have Diane here with Chris here. I always appreciate your background, Lois. Thank you. I try my best. You get me every time. I'm like, really? No. OK, no, no. Yeah, we don't have a lot of people joining today. I still would go over the meeting and I take it as an action. I think for me to ensure that the working group leaders are showing up and presenting back. But I'll take this one offline, obviously. I'll just start with some quick ones. Last meeting, we discussed about questions on the landscape. So the outcome was that people had said, OK, before talking about the landscape and landscape definitions, let's define end user answers. And there was a lot of enthusiasm to say, yes, I know exactly which questions we are dealing with when we're deploying applications with quantities or delivering them. So far, I have not really gotten any input on that one. I also posted it again. Posted it on the mailing list. I'm happy to push it forward. Just for the people over here, please provide your input in there. Moving this forward, last time it was a lot of people who brought this up and wanted to share their input. But so far, we haven't received anything. The question was, how does it structure the landscape? So we run project and scopes of the project or a specific question that the end user is approaching us. And the idea was here around end users. We don't have anybody for air gap and operator joining us today. Let me just share my screen just to realize that I'm not sharing. I think that the biggest push here is for this operator working group was the operator. Definition document, and I'll work on this with the team. It seems like there's a massive number of comments on the doc that need to be worked into this and get into a stable form. There should be a stable form. Already, I'll push back to the team, but we really have something within the next two weeks that we can leave you and send all to a broader audience here. But it doesn't seem to be a lot of input here. I'll talk to the working group just to clean up the document here and moving it forward. This is for that one, air gap. But what is here, they had a presentation from CNAP. Again, for air gap, I can repeat what we discussed the last time. If you have best practices for air gap delivery, please share them with the air gap working group. They're looking, for example, as we have currently one from Cray, which is currently the only one. And if you have best practices, maybe Diane this would also be something for Red Hat. Human Red Hat has the best practice for air gap installation of Kubernetes. So if there's somebody within Red Hat who wanted to share the best practices, that would be awesome. When does the air gap working group meet? It's meeting every other Friday at a time that's brutal for me, but should be fine for you. It's under efficiency in the F calendar. It is Friday. For me, it's 7 p.m., which makes it. Awful. 11. Yeah. Friday, 7 p.m. is really awful for me. But the good thing is I think it makes it on the East Coast. I think it's 11. Yeah, I'm on West Coast time. I will look and see. Who is the chair for the air gap one? It's Jeremy Ricard. I was linked in the chat here. So it's Jeremy. And just throw the link to that into the chat. And that would be great. Yeah, sure. See if I can. Sean Hurley will always talk about that. So I'll just throw it here in the chat. I'm just soon confused right now. One should assume that now that we're spending so much time on Zoom, we know we're wrong just a little bit better. So you have to link. That's the charter. They also have obviously some. So what you're looking for is someone to talk about best practices for air gap. Yes, because they have a best practice document from Cray on how to deploy it. Right now, they are focusing on Kubernetes. And the next step will be applications running on Kubernetes. But how do I install Kubernetes in an air gap environment, like with all the problems that come from it? I can't access the public container registry and all the things that come with it. Let me see what I can do. Yeah, so I think reaching out to Jeremy would be a good starting point here. The next step would be to look. You're looking for information on installing Kubernetes itself in an air gap environment, not just applications? That's what they decided to do. They wanted to go for Kubernetes first and then for applications. Simply as it's the bootstrapping issue, if you can't get Kubernetes there, how do you get the applications on Kubernetes there? That's the working group decided. But eventually, the goal is obviously to look into both. Met's profile picture on Zoom is confusing. It looks like you actually have your camera turned off, but you don't have your camera turned on. And that's deliberate. See more people doing this right now. OK, so yeah, that's not a lot of updates. So, Harry, you were tapping a couple of little bell pegs. Do you want to talk about where we are on this one? Yeah, so I think the issue is quite tricky because we actually got feedback from TOC and the community that we do have a definition of any user for the adopters. Those definitions are very simple, just saying that any user should not sell cloning technology. Well, in this case, this actually means all the criteria for incubation project really needs some revisit because it says it must have three, at least, adopters. They have to be any users. But actually, there are projects, for example, Clonetic Build Pack. The adopters are mostly vendors, according to this definition. So basically, no any users in their adopters. Most of them are Google Cloud or WinVir or Microsoft Cloud. So that is an issue that we may want to discuss. Or we can just pass the Clonetic Build Pack due to the engine dock to TOC because the rest of the dock is just, I think it's already good. The only issue is that the criteria section is not, and now it's not fitting to the incubation label, honestly speaking. But I think the issue is, I think we also have internal speaking with TOC that maybe we want to change the criteria. But this is, again, not just in the scope of state gap delivery, I think. Right, that is it. Yes, I agree. I think this is definitely what you see to define how they see end users. And there are obviously projects where, obviously, let's put that way, an end user should be somebody who is, actually, not selling cloud-native technologies and using the product and using the open source project. In this case, it is mostly obviously cloud providers because that's what BuildPacks are massively used for. It's for a TOC to eventually decide, but they shouldn't usually have problems coming up with somebody who uses BuildPack as the primary way to build their containers. Yeah, that's true. So I think we will add these recommendation or comments in the due diligence doc and then we can pass Cloud-native BuildPack to TOC to do the final re-evaluation. So we cannot do further recommendation at the stage of the state. Yeah, and also the cloud vendors, in this case, are also the ones which are the main contributors. So it seems it looks right now like a very closed ecosystem, but eventually it's up to the TOC to decide on how to handle this. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, and the second question is about sandbox projects. And yeah, I think that's simply the situation we have to wait out right now. So maybe we can give the SIG here an update because not everybody might have joined the TOC calls. Sure, do we have timeline for the new sandbox process? May I ask? I'm not very sure about it. Not yet. We are currently in discussions, so. Okay, so I think it's just changing the temporary hold, the upcoming projects donation, right? No, it's actually not true. Things are still rolling as they are going. This was presented two weeks ago at the TOC meeting. We talked again about it yesterday and we're still kind of working through some of the details. But at the moment, no one is on hold as far as being able to take projects in. I mean, for the upcoming new project. So there are still other projects that they are pushing the SIG. So should we just let them present and then go with the normal process? Yes. Okay, I got it. And is there a plan from the TOC to update the projects on what they should expect? They're still working about what they're going to do around like the existing sandbox proposals and the existing sandbox projects. So I anticipate this is going to be at least another month or so. You think it will be ready by June? Well, given as June is in like two weeks, probably not. Our next TOC meeting is going to be June 2nd. So this is actually a great opportunity to be able to say, hey, SIGET delivery, you'll be presenting there. Would love to be able to take from you. I'll bring it up again because in this case on both sides here, but like for some projects, it has been going on for a while and most people who are obviously also part of this process. And Kima. Yeah. So this is the item I added. So I'm actually, I'm trying to approaching several other projects in this era. And I noticed that Kima is actually, I think it's fixed to SIG at the afternoon reveal, but it actually got to reject the proposal stage. But at that time, we do not have a SIG mechanism actually. So I'm not sure there's any valuation we can eat. We want them to do a presentation or it's done. So... Yeah, there is a proposal third along. I think I looked at it before. I think it's done mostly by SAP, right? Yeah, it's a project from SAP. I would, I think irrespective of whether we take them in as a project into SIG app delivery, I think it would be good for them to present like on some of their, the core concept of how they're doing things. SIG runtime is doing the same when they presented the last time. It would be, I think definitely good to have a presentation because this is, I think the audience that is interested in what they're doing. So I'm open to even have the presentation, even if think, well, we're not sure whether we want to be part of CNCF or not. But having app delivery related projects make sense. And technically, they're obviously part of the CNCF landscape because they are an open source project by one of the CNCF members. So I think even for the sake of discussion, I think it makes sense to present there. Do you know somebody from Kima? Not yet, but I'm trying to talk with them. I hope they can do some presentation in the SIG because I personally think they are actually in the scope of the SIG very well. So let's see. In case you need some pointers to SAP if they don't reply by the meeting list that we know at. Okay. Know some of the cloud people at SAP can help there. Okay, sure, sure. I don't have contact people for now. I will try to approach someone. So if I fail, I will talk with you. Yeah, just let me know. Okay. Yeah, and Amy, we have the logo, but we don't have a lot of people here. That's okay. I can basically get people to vote on the issue from here and then I can take a vote. I have it open. So yeah, we have, this one's the latest proposal doc. That's just the issue. This is the latest one, right? Yes, that is the latest one. So I'm hoping to let Jackson here because I don't really want to do a vote with like all million of these, but I will, you know. Yeah. Yeah, so let's give people some time to post on. I think we had some people weighing in. We know that Diane obviously likes bees or what are the ants? One after two. I like bugs. Bugs, okay, that's fine. So yeah, let's give people, try and we have some people weighing in and then restrict it to those like the top three and then take the votes on those. I will also pass my, so okay. I think that's pretty much everything we had on the agenda for today. I have another topic. Yeah. Have you ever think about, maybe we can change the SIGAP delivery questionnaire for landscape to a Google form so we can send out it to people to fill in instead of working when they start mutations? Do you think that will help? That would be easy. I can do that. Okay, yeah. I think the form will be either for people to fill in, we just send it to everyone. They send me God feedback. Yeah, I can easily do that. I can send it around. But hopefully we get a bit more and also to still share it with people. Yeah, of course. All right, then we don't have anything else on the agenda for today. Okay, I'll keep, I'll make the other group just to have a bit more to present for the next two weeks. I'll wait two weeks for now. Okay, then let's call it. I can, let's call it. Sir, I just jumped in at the end. So my name is Lukas. I'm just here actually not for a reason of Kima for totally different reason. Just wanted to show, to see how you work. But I heard Harry mentioned Kima. So I was actually working in Kima a few months back. So I know good contact points from Kima that I can give you. So we should probably think somehow offline. Okay. So I think I can approach you through the Slack, right? Yeah, I'm still on Kima Slack available. So. Okay, yeah, I will try to pin you today. So I'd like to get some detail about this project. Maybe you guys can do a presentation in the future. Cool. Okay. Yeah, thanks. Okay, then that's it for today, I assume. Thanks everyone. See you in two weeks. All right. Thanks always. Bye bye.