 Test test your post that this George Excellence, let me get the screen sharing on Chris short. It's great to see you Likewise, how are you busy? Let's see how this looks for people here. How's that looking for folks he sighs it here you're on your Linux box, right? Yeah, what do you need? So it looks like it's sharing part of the dog half the screen. Yeah It's like part of the browser window it's sharing when uh, how about this? There we go. All right You find ways to break things well done. I did practice ahead of time I know this is this is like this is why like zoom is a wonderful and and like arcane art and we practiced periodically So yeah, let's go ahead and get the Slides up and running and all of that. Thank you for sharing the duck and we'll give people Is it this No scrolling down. It's under the agenda. Yeah Agenda notes. There you go. Ah, thank you very much. Okay roll. All right. How's that look you are ready rock? Emily we've got 20 folks in here. We'll give a few more minutes for like, you know people to come on in But whenever you want to rock and roll Let's wait another minute. I know some folks had meetings that were probably running over I mean, I certainly looked up and was like, oh that email that I was writing. I should stop writing that. Yes I had the same thing of like I love this, but I have to run Like oh look. Oh look at the time. Oh my oh my I hope to see as many of you as possible at the project pavilion if you're going to Paris Got caffeine. I hear we have the best lounge area and the entire conference center There's a lot more projects. Let's sign up for the project pavilion too, which is going to be very exciting All right, let's go ahead and get started Hello, everyone today is march 5th 2024 and you have arrived at the cncf to see meeting. It is the first Monday of the month So we are starting off with our technical advisory group discussion Next slide, please As a reminder Your participation in these meetings means your compliance with the linux foundation's antitrust policy notice if you are unfamiliar with it The url is on the slide Next please review if you have any questions reach out to cncf and you've made it here logistics on the slide next slide We have several to c members present here today But we are not going to be doing any decision-making George it looks like you've got another window on top of this slide deck that's covering some other content Or at least cutting it off Oh, no Hopefully we don't have long sentences on the next slides if we can't figure it out I think we'll be okay. And if we can't we'll we'll think of something Okay, go right ahead All right So a few updates from the toc off site is on the agenda for today but most of the discussion is going to be on To see and tag chairs meeting for cube con. So let's go to the next slide First off we have a new toc member Davenham Sorry dims is joining us again formerly from the toc We also during the toc off site decided that we need to have a vice chair position to help offload Some of the work that the chair is currently tackling First we needed to document what the work was that the the chair was doing. We've done that now We've decided to break out the work for a more equitable distribution amongst all of the toc members So we're hoping in 2024. This will be a huge change and will help us moving forward George we've got some weird screen sharing going on again. Okay. I've clearly failed at this Blame Linux. Yeah, a Linux has failed you This was uh working earlier, uh, can you give me a sec here? Of course. I can talk all day if needed So while we're working on slides a few of the updates from the toc off site We onboarded all of our new members. So for those of you that aren't familiar with it The toc merged in significant changes to our repo that Articulate what the expectations of being a toc member are from a time commitment perspective As well as a little bit more detail on how we operate and what the expectations for how we operate work That was very informative for new and existing toc members to establish a little bit more consistency amongst ourselves We also had some engaging discussions on project acceptance and scope Trying to document some previous toc decisions on precedent setting for technology and the definition around what is cloud native We're hoping that this will help us moving forward in reviewing sandbox applications as well as engaging with projects We also talked about what the next steps for the toc post cubecon are to include the project backlog and the next topic of discussion for today's meeting Um, we are we have an open pr right now that is undergone toc voting for Changes to the moving levels process as a result of the recommendations from the moving levels task force So a huge thank you to all of those individuals that participated in that work We're getting really close to getting those changes merged in With a new process and what the impact is to projects. We're hoping it's positive and hopefully make this process significantly faster in clear rq okay, so Next slide is supposed to be talk and tag chairs meeting at cubecon. So What we want to do is on wednesday march 20th from 3 to 5 30 local time at cubecon Um, we are having our talk in our tag chairs meeting in the past. We've had several of these meetings We've identified a lot of issues We've talked about a lot of challenges and potential opportunities But ultimately what ends up happening at these meetings as we walk away without an action plan So today what I would like to do is try to get all of us on the same page for what we want to accomplish At the end of that meeting So hopefully getting us to a point where we have an action plan for the future of what the tags look like Depending on what that is. I want us to be able to say here's the corresponding issues where we have work these are the individuals that are going to be assigned And set out what that direction in that roadmap is moving forward for the technical advisory groups Okay, um, let me pause real quick I know george is joining. Hopefully We'll have better luck as fast as I can. I'm sorry. No, you're fine. No worries um So we have some open questions around this conversation The toc is not inclined to work in a vacuum. Our technical advisory groups have been around for a significant amount of time They've been working in the ecosystem when we do rely on their expertise. So we want to make sure that any suggestions ideas um recommendations are with the considerations from the technical advisory groups moving forward based off of changes within the ecosystem that we've seen um So one of the questions we have is around tag health and a dashboard. We have an ongoing discussion on the toc repo What makes a sustainable tag? What are our most successful tags? Um, what are the characteristics of them? What do they look like? um, we also want to know what the future of the tags are we have a proposed tags concept that has existed on the toc repo for a while um But perhaps we need to revisit that and allow for proposals of new tags based off of interest and changes within the um within the ecosystem and the community We're on slide seven That looking better Yes, thank you Whatever you did was great because I was working over in the back channel to be able to wake up like the second screen sharing The thing that I have so great cool rock and roll um No worries technology we can master it will be winners um So some of the items that the toc is considering based off of the discussion that we had with the off site was Exploration groups So we do get a lot of requests for hey, can we set up a new tag in this Technical area, but it's too new. It's like very emerging It's a lot of exploration needs to be done to understand what the impact of that technical area is in the domain of cloud native and whether or not Technology should be doing something in that space We see this with the ai working group is a really good example of this However, what we want to understand is whether or not some of these exploration activities should be a little bit more time boxed And then provide recommendations back out to the toc and the tags for next steps Do we need a new group? Should this be a paper? Should this just be advice and guidance to projects? So things like that um, that was one of the areas we talked about We also discussed technical review groups So this is slightly different than the reviews that for instance Tag security does in a joint review or contributor strategy does in a governance review or the grain reviews group from environmental sustainability This is more about There is a project in an existing technical domain We want to understand how the project fits within that technical domain. So like networking is a really good example For a service mesh project, how is it operating? What is the comparative differences between the existing service mesh projects within the ecosystem? What is the value differentiation for potential adapters if they're looking between this project or this project? How can they discern what those differences are to pick the best one for them? As well as is the project implementing cloud native engineering principles within that particular technical domain area Um, so that's the technical review category that we kind of talked about So i'm presenting all this information to you in hopes that we can go to the next slide And talk through a little bit more about what are possible changes suggestions recommendations Um, so that when we go to the toc tag meeting at cube con We have that action plan. What questions what additional questions do we need to answer? so a few areas we talked about is tag delivery tag app delivery based off of recommendations from the technical leads as well as the chairs There's a ton of work within that group that should probably be broken out Because they're overburdened with the volume of work that they have Um tag network intense storage. We've seen some shifts within the ecosystem and the emergence of platform engineering and more infrastructure oriented work where some of these functions are being grouped together Does that make sense for us? It might not Um, and do we need to have a tag developer experience that's separate from contributor strategy developer experience focusing exclusively on onboarding Developers into the cloud native ecosystem for projects making it easier for developers when they approach a project to get started in Contributing to it or implementing it within their existing applications infrastructure things like that So i'm going to stop talking because i'm sure that there are a lot of individuals with a lot of opinions on this But i would like to remind everybody the intent is not to Make decisions today on any of these but rather create a structure so that we can make decisions and have a direction at the meeting at kubecon Hey, Emily Would it be possible to share what? So the outcome of any of the discussions in the off site was around The roles of The tags because it's kind of hard to have a Conversation about what to discuss if we don't know what we're supposed to be doing or like if any decisions were taken in that space um, so we did not make any decisions in that space and we did not do a Good job clarifying what some of the functions of tags were The three areas that we had immediately identified that tags are currently doing And we want them to continue doing is kind of that technical review That was one function the other function was kind of that prescriptive guidance So a joint review for instance or a grain reviews or governance review And then that exploration kind of category providing advice and recommendations Both to the toc as well as adapter. So that's a little bit more of the education and awareness aspect of it And then I'm going to turn it over carina and then Aaron Duffy and chris So plus one to alex's comment. Um, and then also it would be good to identify whether We're going to have additional standardization across the tags because that would really help with Some of the changes that you're talking about. Um, it's going to ask if what you were talking about For tag developer experience, whether that is an extension of the mentoring working group that came out of contributor strategy and whether You'd be pulling that out because that would be interesting um Plus one to a tag infrastructure and then also I do have thoughts around what you're saying about tag app delivery and possibly New tags, but I know there's a lot of hands up so I can shelve that for right now and raise my hand again so adding just a bit more color to the discussion at the off site was Remembering how these were even formed, right? I think that's really important like eight years ago. We had six and we were rapidly trying to scale up the Toc which was even fewer people sat I think it was only six people were on the toc at that point and the number of submissions coming into the Foundation for consideration were just like we were buried, you know And so at that point We really relied on the sigs at that point to be the subject matter experts to evaluate new technologies and provide recommendations to the toc I see people who've who've been around like me for for this whole time to like remember what that was then there was a shift To move to tags and and to kind of lighten the load of the tags and responsibility of what we consider There was just some very good constructive conversation at the off side of Do we need to take a step back? Do we need to reevaluate? What we think because when we formed the sigs We basically just said who wants to do it go figure out how you're going to run it and write it all down And we just went because that that was the culture now that we've we've done that and as a community We figure out what doesn't work. What does work? We do want to formalize those responsibilities and how What we believe how the tags can help the toc better scale and have You know, really that's you are the right people Who deal with the technology in and out and and you know, we don't always have proper representation across the toc I think I've always said this for every single technology that we have coming in and so we we really do need to create a better structure between The tags and the toc But this is a community we're not the toc isn't looking to be prescriptive and tell everyone This is how you're going to run your tags because they they definitely have different cultures and personalities and things that work well and don't but I do think some sort of semblance of At least roles and responsibilities that are the same across them makes a lot of sense And you know really provides an on ramp for leadership In a sustaining continuity between the tags and the toc, which we haven't had in the past. So That was our intention That's that's why we want to have this meeting face to face. We want to talk about it But as the cncf and the toc evolve I feel like that's the only healthy path So this is to sustaining all of these things it also is You know, we need to reevaluate the things that are on our ecosystem if they still make sense and that that can't just be done by The few people that are on the toc. We would need more help. So we're really going to be I think looking to Have a better formal working relationship between the toc and the tags. So I'll pause there Thank you Aaron Buffy and then chris yeah, I think um I like I like this call to action I think we have a good a good opportunity to get a lot of information from the people who are in this audience The question is how do they give it to us? So should we create a shared document? Should we make this a survey? Should we open a github discussion? Where are these ideas can can be collated or put together in one place like how do they What should we do there? That's a really good question and I don't have an answer for it because we we tried Starting the discussion on github, but it got a little bit derailed With a lot of other topics. So I want to make sure that we're a little bit more constructive here um, I'm open to suggestions Maybe a survey is the right thing just basically frame the question in a survey and then leave open Leave open space for people to give their ideas and then we can kind of spend some time collecting and parsing them before the before the event Okay, I like that idea um So that's something that the toc can take an action item on is to put together a survey with a few questions Try to keep it simple but open-ended for anybody to provide their opinions in a manner that is Um allows them to speak freely Um, so we can certainly do that chris You are very muted. Yes I am so muted. I'm sorry. There you go. Come on back. I'm trying not to have my snarky calm. Let's come across anyway um if we're talking about Tag developer experience and tag contributor script strategy like a huge plus one to what erin said about like maybe it's time to Re-evaluate what we have as someone I know personally like like myself I've struggled with working in the tags, right like it's been Hard for me to find my way and get footing and all You know, it's just it's nebulous as it is And I think if we just keep adding and combining or splitting It's just going to get more nebulous and maybe there it is it is time for a wholesale review of kind of like Are we getting what we need from this? Do we have the right structure in place and we're closed? Obviously um But anytime you start talking about two tags with potentially conflicting like uh You know purposes like developer experience and contributor strategy Like that just raises a red flag for me in sense of like the organization overall Thank you. It's gross Alex I'm a little confused I I thought we Had a discussion in github. We had a discussion in the tsc anything before we do off-science And I was kind of to be honest really hopeful that Today we would have like a grand reveal where the tsc would say We think these five things are what the tags should focus on because these are the things we need help with because That's all remember the whole point of the tags was to help the tsc scale So the tsc kind of does need to say these are the things we need help with Once we have that Then all of these other changes and ideas are up for discussion, but before we have that How can we contemplate whether to Split tags create new tags or combine tags If we don't actually know what we want out of the tags I mean Surely we need to start with these are the five things or the ten things or whatever we want the tags to do And by the way, this is how we're going to engage with them because The the the ambiguity that that I think um Chris just mentioned is because we we're lacking Well the formality, right? So, you know, we don't have a formal way of Say to see liaisons to engage with the tags, you know, you know In any sort of structured way, it's all kind of very ad hoc you know, and I'm looking at the github issue around how do we collect metrics on the tags and I'm like, well, what do you want to collect for? What reason for what audience? And wouldn't the to see notice that the to see liaisons actually spoke to the tag chairs every once in a while anyway Yeah, I'm a little stuck. I don't know where to go from here because We we kind of need somebody to say this is what we need from the tags and then we can do all the rest So I I'm worried the way we're communicating is ineffective alex because I do think that's we I think before we went to the to see off site. We're not changing anything. We're saying we're just emphasizing that is where we got if if the tags we I don't feel like we had the complete Feedback from all of the tags in the community though of what that should look like if if there's a preference to just Be more talk down and say this is exactly what we want from the tags and this is how this is going to work It doesn't feel very community oriented And that's where we wanted the possibility of having this face-to-face at cube con to solidify what the plan is but the overall intention of what we're doing is a hundred percent consistency Scaling and also does it make sense like do the current tags we have make sense? It doesn't make more sense to actually go back and maybe have some tags combined Or have some tags that we archive or have new tags like it's it's just also a point in time where Given where technology is going do these things still make sense? So what we don't want to do is say The structure we came up with eight years ago still makes sense and we're going to keep going on that road And now all of you are responsible for the same things Even if those don't make sense because that isn't the areas that we're growing and the cloud need a vehicle system anymore And so that is what is different that came out of that is Do we need to take a step back make sure that the tags we have are effective and are healthy? before we go You know putting more requirements on these tags that may not be able to deliver it because there's varying Uh Not all tags are Efficient or have good attendance or have healthy communities behind them right now. Let's just be honest Right and and what can we do to help? Like is it just not something we should have a tag for because it's not really the focus We don't have a lot going on there or or do we need new leadership? Or do we need more structure? Like we're just we're trying to open it up to all of you who who lead the tags and not be overly prescriptive And I don't feel like that's changed from the overall intention of where we want to get to So A quick quick reply to that I I completely get that And i'm not here to kind of be Prescribe how the community works. That's clearly not what we want to do But on the flip side the toc has a has a set of functions that the toc needs to do You know, whether it's project reviews or you know, make certain classes of decisions and they have a role and the tags are there Initially and supposedly now to help the toc scale so There is a certain part of what the tags should be doing That needs to be defined by the toc because the toc Needs to be able to scale its role So if there are certain things that toc needs help with whether it's project reviews, whether it's information on particular things, whether it's you know, working with the community Like in the in the contributor strategy or whatever And those are the things that talk Needs the tags to do And it should be perfectly fine to say the toc needs the tags to do those things because They need that to happen in order to scale perhaps, right? I don't think that that should be that controversial obviously each of the tags have their own other things that they want that they want or Need to do whether it's help with educational papers or facilitate working groups or build community or help projects in other ways and things like that That's fine, too But I think we kind of need to start with Formalizing What the toc actually needs from the tags because it's kind of hard to say We want to measure the tags at how effective they're being When you haven't actually told them what you want them to do Or what you need them to do and then You know, somehow say well, this isn't working By based on a measure that we haven't even defined that that Is frustrating for me Perhaps we haven't really measured In a public way the fact that we have asked these questions and that we haven't Really like felt the a team lift in some of these areas I think perhaps that's what you're not seeing And what we're trying to do is come to a place where as a community, how do we address those things? How do we get buy-in on both sides before trying again? so Go ahead. Erin I hear you Alex and and this was not intended to like be To beat the tags over the head that they're not delivering on something that we've never communicated is expected of them Like I want to say that out loud We just believe we can collectively be more effective and we can empower the tags more than we have we've gone through kind of this Interesting like a lot of responsibility a little responsibility more responsibility and we haven't written it down So you're exactly right. We need to As a team Agree how we should move forward and how we should measure these things I don't think that negates us from understanding if the tags today have good attendance Like how should how should we be measuring that that tag is healthy? We're not saying we're going to eliminate it based on you know Be this criteria that we've never published that that's not at all our intention We're just putting it out to the tags is to how can we help how can we work better together? Create some criteria for health inconsistency Know what's expected what you expect from us and what we need to deliver We need to be held accountable as well, right? But what is the best thing for the community as it has evolved from when these tags were created? I just want to make it clear that we're not We're not we're not judging the tags. We're not you know We're asking like a call to action of how can we collaborate better? Are we doing the right things for the community with our current structure? And and how do we make sure that those are set up for success? And so I'm hoping we can have a good dialogue around that and come by the end of cube con Have a prescriptive set of things that both of us are going to do to to enable that arena Yeah Oh, sorry. I think you're going to explain. Sorry Did you say marina or Karina Karina? So Looking at the comments too, I like Leo's comment about you know collecting You know the bad and good from the tags that goes back to the survey and then I I guess I'm concerned that we only have a short amount of time in paris for this meeting So as and this is It's two weeks away essentially, so If we have a survey collect that prior and the questions Do we have It would be great to identify other times during the week that maybe we can talk about it Or even identify You know like the project's moving levels task force where there's a representative from each tag to kind of dive further into it And come out with the recommendations on one what could be standardization across the tags to You know with the to see what the to see is asking for and then three what the tags are asking for from the to see um So just put them up out there Hey I've got that noted. So I want to I will read Bob's comment before I provide my statement um Bob talked about uh in kubernetes. They have n or reports They've cut most of the metrics and such basically fallen back to asking the leads What is it you want to highlight what's working? Well, what areas need help? So those are like those are kind of the same things that we do that we've turned over to the mailing list for our technical advisory groups um, and for those Tags that haven't submitted those emails on the mailing list I implore you to do so because that is something that the to see can actually spend time responding to instead of Like part of the challenge was we had you all doing presentations to us I feel like that was a lot more work It was a lot more expectations from you all to pull that information together and have somebody show up to the meeting And then talk about that and if you're not involved in that particular effort You might have a little difficulty speaking to those in depth if we have questions Turning that over to a mailing list on the to see everybody on that mailing list can see what it is that you're working on The links are embedded. They can go there. They can ask more questions I've provided responses to some of those updates and I I think it engages in a meaningful conversation with the tags That way from a health perspective um All that being said What I have heard is the to see has an obligation to provide the tags with a direction on what we're expecting you to perform We've done that but we have not had it documented yet. So we started that discussion at the off site We owe you a write-up of what that actually looks like Hurt we will provide that and um probably as part of the survey so that everybody is receiving the same information And to see members if you have other ideas, please stop me interrupt drop them in the chat. Love to hear them So the to see is going to define what a technical a domain technical review from a tag actually looks like because that's an expectation We have four tags to engage with projects is that you're engaging with them It's not them showing up to a meeting and doing a presentation. Yay. Look at this awesome project Have a nice day It is a presentation to a tag about the project and the inner workings of the project and how it functions and the value add that It provides to the ecosystem and how it's different from other projects to adopters and identifying Are there opportunities for improvements features fixes those kinds of things that the project could benefit from to provide better appeal Or to improve the sustainability of the project moving forward um We're going to define kind of what it is that we mean when we talk about exploration groups Do those exist within tags or not? Is this a separate area? Um, I believe we also talked about inviting the technical advisory board to have participation in those groups So we get end user involvement and feedback. I think that was one of the discussions from the off site um, and then the We'll also define Criteria reviews so a joint review or a security audit or a governance review or green views those kinds of things where we have Moving levels criteria that correspond with a more in-depth and focused analysis of how the project is operating in a particular area We can provide that One of the areas we also identified that tags perform as a function is providing education and awareness So that that's expected Now what you all may not have known or maybe you did is that we had asked To cncf to kind of do an audit of all the tag charters And all of the readme's on the tag repos and kind of just looking across all of the tags to understand that work We've had those documents We've provided provided some review and some analysis of it but the intent is to offload the administrative kind of charter updates of What's the deliverables are? So that we can provide those as standard and consistent across all the tags And then it allows us to focus with you all on the particular technical domain areas So for paris, we're going to put together the survey We'll be able to find what the technical domain reviews from a tag look like what is an exploration group if we're going to pursue that as a recommendation and which domains have Moving levels kind of criteria reviews that need to be performed Did I miss anything? Because I know karina you're concerned about the timeliness before cubecon to make sure that we have time to come up with an action Heard noted I'm expecting groups to form out of the toc tag meeting at cubecon Similar to how we did the moving levels task force We're not doing this in a vacuum and we trust that all of our technical leads and chairs within this group Have the interests of the domain at heart and they want to see us being successful Questions comments other ideas. Is this a good path? Does this make sense? I know that there are a lot of concerns and this is very nebulous But we are trying to fix it and we are trying to do it in a collaborative way where we're all on board and on the same page One maybe small comments If we want a community to scale Um, then it kind of probably goes hand in hand with how we want the toc to scale Um So for example, you know this and this might be a bad example But it is something I've felt acutely in in a in a storage tag, which is when We originally set up the tags in the six in the first place There was an expectation That's you know sandbox projects, for example might present to a tag and they would engage in the community and we would get feedback and that would be part of the recommendation that goes to toc as part of the sandbox process And that kind of did create a community and people attended the tag meetings to learn about the projects and find out about all of those things Um, and of course we developed a backlog because you know, we always develop backlogs and we condensed it to The new process which is which is sort of very focused on Funding everything through quicker review sessions in the toc But that in itself removed like a huge opportunity for the communities to engage and the projects to talk to each other um And I I don't know if other tags have felt these sorts of things, but the the very aspect of you know centralizing Um every aspect of decision-making and not delegating anything at all also stops the tags from or or kind of creates the synoptic creates the circumstances that can lead to tags becoming unhealthy in itself Or yeah and to resonate yeah to resonate with alex's comments or sort of Yeah, renders that sort of neuters them a bit or renders them Depending upon how active some of their working groups might be A portion of the value that they might offer is You know goes away in in that moment um Yeah, there's been So for my part I think if memory serves it's been a long time I think they had like early working groups before we had sigs and then we renamed them to tags and And the pendulum is kind of as you would naturally expect with kind of roles and responsibilities have shifted over time and I have to admit despite how the how many hours and hours and hours I've spent on this call in particular Are for over the years and years which is wonderful like I I give up other many other meetings to come here to spend the time um is I'm I'm confused as to Where is how we're supposed Yeah, how it is that the tags do add some of that value I think some of it right now is like a solicitation in general to create discussion and attract help attract potential new projects and do some potential upfront evaluation about them um to to Sometimes um have a review do do that not just a presentation, but what um What was being expressed a moment ago about digging into the projects themselves? I'm asking some of those more probing questions helping Prepare them for presentation in a quick summary to the to see so that it's digestible There's some amount of sort of opinion written about it so that it could be some summarization points um and or But a little bit of it's in flux in my mind in terms of If that it just happens at one level or all the levels or There's some amount of convention that that certainly the Tag network follows, but I don't know that it's Expressively in line with things that are written elsewhere Actually just having submitted a project for incubation proposal Oh man, this is like I'm kind of It's since I think in the spirit of what I caught the second half of what erin was saying is is like hey We're in it with you guys. We're trying to figure out you How do we do this thing and we're at a particular point in in the evolution of the Toc and the cncf overall and so of course these things need to change over time um Just being on the submitter side of a project I think all that is required is to Create the proposal and submit it and then from the project's perspective that is sort of a wait for their direction, but Yeah, that's all and maybe it's just me that's confused. Maybe I just been here too long So I You are not the only one that's confusedly. We've heard that same feedback from maintainers We are working on fixing that Um and providing guidance specifically to projects on expectations for what does it mean to move levels? What does that look like? We don't have an answer for that one yet. It still needs to be written up that content still needs to be provided the toc has in the outstanding pure that's Just wrapped up voting kind of details what the toc expectations and guidelines for contacting due diligence on pro projects are there's also an an updated Process document to convey that to projects, but we have not captured Um Where tags fit into that because we want to ensure that this discussion that we're having here Is appropriately represented because what we don't want to do is we don't want to Delegate a ton of work to the tags And have you all swamped and unable to deliver on we want to make sure that you are set up for success In a way that is meaningful that allows you autonomy In some of the engagements that you're having with projects where it's needed Like if you find a project that's fondering and they're not being successful in a particular area You should be able to engage with them if you find opportunities for project a to engage and interact with project b We want you to have those discussions and bring them together in a discussion dims Hi, um, I was curious about something that alex and lee both voiced briefly, which was Delegation of authority, right? Like what is it? What are a couple of examples that you can think of? That we can delegate to the tags That we are not doing today that will possibly help You know gather some momentum in participation from projects So two very obvious ones would be um to Have recommendations from the tags around sandbox to get sandbox projects to engage in the tanks more Um and build the community that way because The sandbox project process at the moment doesn't allow them doesn't provide them a venue to to engage unless they actually want to um and The other thing would be for example to get more actively involved in say working on the due diligence for An incubation or graduation, you know, like Obviously in all cases the toc has to be the decision maker, right? I'm not suggesting that for like applicating responsibility, but we can easily have Liaisons working with tags to do those sort of roles together and that also kind of creates them a like a pipeline of you know knowledgeable candidates that can be that can join the toc in future So it feels like sandbox and um, you know proposals for moving levels Kind of bypasses the tags is is the feeling that i'm getting Lee, did you have anything Uh, else other than those two? Yeah, that was um, maybe another so yeah when that had occurred it was sort of like well What would you say that you do here? was Maybe use an office space preference a terrible one and it's like Gosh, well, we've gotten active at least for tag network. It's like we have a pretty active um working group and uh so in Lou of Tag network agenda items. We just reuse the same time to host the working group meeting and part of the feedback Recent feedback was you know hate to maybe not do that to have to hold to not use that time to and so So for lack of sandbox route, you know for lack of um So so some of tag networks agenda has been Nominal minimal, you know in part because it's like well Okay So if you use something like what we use for code reviews, right like reviewers approvers the tags are the reviewers for better or worse and like, you know and To see are the approvers so to say right so having that two levels of Things might be helpful. Uh, it sounds like Yeah Any anybody else um who has uh an idea of Other than these specific Things that we talked about just now so I want to make sure that we have that we're going to capture those any Data driven format. So I want to ask this question on the survey Um, absolutely like I'm mining for things to ask on the survey here So yeah got it. Um So let's ask that one on the survey. What other questions? Um Would the tags like the opportunity to provide their perspective or recommendations forward on? I am I don't want to put anybody on the spot on expressing their opinions If they're uncomfortable doing that in this forum I want to make sure that they have the opportunity to do so on the survey But if there are other questions like I don't know How do we modify the due diligence process recommendations to be more Inforcive and inclusive of tags like I'm looking over the pr right now in the dd toc guide and line 124 It talks about engaging tags, but it's all encouragement not necessarily a formal requirement by the toc to engage the tags That's a simple change that we can do but we need to define what that engagement looks like karina Thank you. Um So one thing is how do How do we as tags um work together with the other tags? um Because i'm not really articulating that well, but um one thing we've been trying to do at least with tag app delivery is invite other tags if there's a project that is You know looks like it's cross tags and thank you amy for you know tagging different tags in the project applications um So really how can we do better? in cross tag pollination For example the connect rpc project Where you know because we have the api discussions, you know, we talked about in tag app delivery And then they went to tag network. It makes sense being in tag network But we're spending a lot of time where we could be more efficient and then also have more cross tag communication And not just with the toc, but cross tags ourselves So how do we do better at that And what are some ideas? I can think of like two of the top of my head one is you can reuse the cnc of toc mailing list for sure, right? for cross tag tagging different people because most of the Tag chairs and technical leads are there but Going back to what emily said a moment ago around safe space it feels like we need like a closed slag channel where we can vent and voice and rant and do other things between You know all of us here both the Toc and the tags that might be another option karina But it's also a good question for the survey What other questions should we include on the survey were? Folks have opinions or recommendations or insights that they want to share that will help inform A roadmap and direction for the toc tag meeting at kubecon We should probably define Anything that's non-standards In the tags i.e. any non-standard functions that we currently use the tags to do You know like for example tax security does security reviews or audits and Interview through strategy has like some specific functions, which are unique to them Um, we should probably define what those are Um to make sure that that is part of the process for the toc as well So i want to make sure i got that one captured correctly alex. What are examples of Standardized work that tags perform for projects that support the moving levels process Or are you looking for what is non-standard work that the tags are occasionally pulled into? or both so Right story if i wasn't clear I think there are a bunch of things that tags do across the board right every tag has has a similar mandate to help educate and users to help the toc members to maybe do review projects to And things like that and then there are Special tasks like security others for example, which are you know a specific responsibility of Tag security for example and Contributed strategy and a couple of other tags might have very specific things that they're tasked to do Which are not you know generic Things which we should just capture because obviously we we we want to standardize Charters and things like that, but there are some obvious Specifics that need to be captured Got it and also thanks bob for the services portion of that question We won't use the term services because we don't have service level agreements, but Point taken Okay We've got eight minutes left Um Kathy um, yeah, I think that's uh, that's a great quarantine. Oh Um, I just just uh, uh lonely drafted, you know on document what toc expects from the tags And there could be some you know different specific tags. Maybe have some, you know specific Um work which they can help toc Um, so I think we need to pull that out another thing is um When we draft that that you know, what? toc expects from tags We probably can also have a survey questions that are asking each tag chair or these so what they think Each tag they think, you know, they can help toc from their perspective, right? I think You know, they think they can help And then we can collect that and then we work together. Um, you know, what toc expects from tag I I would like this not just come from toc perspective, but also, you know, it's a joint effort captured Actually, I have another one. I want to come back to what Aaron said before. Um, I think, you know, the As technologies evolve The current, you know, the the tags set in currently we have, you know, different tags, right? Not working, you know, run time I have delivery environmental, you know, observability, etc But those were set up some time, I mean some years back So as technologies evolve, we may need to think about it, you know, whether we need A new a new tags or whether, you know, existing tag, you know, can be broken into, you know, several tags I think this is a also a very valid point which Aaron addressed Because we need to evolve with, you know, as technologies evolve Of course, this one because also work together Saying, you know, how we should, you know, um We should do this in addition to how we should, you know, more standard Standardize the operations across tags, right? So that, you know, um, all the tags Can be effective In the same way But in addition to that, we may also think about, you know How we should, whether we should add new tags or should break up a existing tag into several tags Captured Lynn Yeah, hi. I think the discussion here are really really interesting I apologize to some of you. I think I share a doc about chatter walking document about tag Which I think it's in the toc private repo or Drive at the moment So for that document, I do think it will be extremely valuable for Toc to specify two alex points. I think I think they also had similar points What are the expectation? What are the goals for For the tag in general not for each specific tag, right for the each specific tag We are going to rely on the tag co-chair to come up with that But I think it's extremely valuable as part of the charter doc for us to specify the roles and expectation and goals for each tag at the high level Similar as Emily, the team the toc team recently went through our onboarding document for toc new members What are the expectations for toc member? What are the expectations for the chair and the Vice chair for toc. I feel like we probably need something for the tag as well and Maybe the toc can set the high level agreement and the Expectation and then each tag maybe have their additional and more detailed onboarding and roles and expectation to follow And the other point I want to make is I think the discussion here is really interesting It might be good to allocate one or two toc member to lead and drive the work To get to closure because I feel like we can discuss for the entire day, but you know not Be able to drive this to resolution if we don't have like a focus Point of contact Yep, that actually leads me into the next question So toc members on the call. I've been taking notes during this meeting trying to capture some of the questions that need to be asked on the form Is there a toc member that has time this week to put together a survey? Working with amy and laf to make sure that we've got the language correct and Issued out onto a google form that way we can start collecting some of those responses So Emily I if you share your notes with me, I'd be happy to do it because I did it for the clown native In the next decade survey, so but I didn't take good notes so far Hey All right, so Lynn Uh I will make sure that that document is shared with you and with amy so that we can put together that survey Let's try to get that out this week Um, and then for The toc tag meeting in paris um Is there a toc member that is interested in Co-leading the discussion to ensure that we get an outcome and that we have a roadmap and a strategy and we're creating all those things I don't want to put somebody on the spot to run the whole thing unless they are interested Happy to provide support Duffy we want to go yeah Awesome. Thank you. Duffy all right So with one minute left action items I'm going to share the meeting and I would start with Lynn and amy so that we can put together a survey get that out this week I'll also coordinate with duffy on how we're going to be managing and executing our meeting during kubecon to be the most effective and outcome oriented including Consolidating and sharing the feedback out from the survey so that we can all have it informed decision And next steps coming out of paris Did I miss anything? Karina I was going to type it in the chat, but um, I'm happy to volunteer to help at least from the tag side with What you just talked about So the agenda and everything like that But okay. All right Thank you, Karina. I appreciate that I'll make sure it's also shared with you and then we can sync up offline on how how to manage that all right Thank you everyone for your time today. I know that there are a lot of strongly held opinions and perspectives and I appreciate everyone sharing them either here or through the survey So I'm going to thank you all in advance um I'm hoping that After paris we will be excited around what's coming next For tags and for the toc and for cncf Thank you everyone. Enjoy the rest of your day Thank you. Bye