 Good morning, we have made it to the closed to see meeting where we are reviewing sandbox applications. The very first one up is boomerang flow and I'm going to hold the floor open for folks to be able to discuss boomerang flow. And of note, there are some actual comments in the document as well so if you can come on and take a look at this one that'd be super. There are plenty of projects under this GitHub umbrella. And I was wondering if anybody found a place where with the reference architecture explaining how all these projects fit together. I couldn't. I had the same problem trying to understand also how many people contributed. My observation was that I think this was an IBM originated project at some point. And even though they haven't mentioned IBM and you are prominently Tyson was an IBM or before, and he's still associated with the project. That was the only thing I could. I found some presentation where the three people are from IBM. Right. I don't know what to say to say no to them. That's the way I'm looking at it. Would it be better to have them reapply with like more clarity around where their roadmap is or not sure where the confusion is. I think the confusion is the majority and the other roadmap. There is a there is specifically a roadmap page planning and roadmap. I didn't see the roadmap page. Can you share it here. Yeah, there's a roadmap repo. Oh, yeah. That's, that's not. Yeah, it doesn't have to go that you're right. Yeah, it doesn't have one so I guess I don't see how it would. Like, if the basis is we can see this eventually becoming a graduated project. At some point. I don't get a warm fuzzy. And the reasons that they've given for joining CNCF is not very. They want contributors and they want us to help with governance and like, you know, they need to be showing that they're already doing something. I don't know. Okay, I have them written down as Bri apply with a more clear roadmap. Fair. All right, we can move on. And our next one up is ACRI. This is a day slabs, Microsoft. This whole bunch of people working on it. Yeah, definitely a little bit more mature than the then boomerang. How does it align with other projects like the beach and open your other projects in the edge domain. I couldn't find this. It's not a it's not a blocker. I was just curious. I think it's project workers own attraction of devices, instead of the age of platform so I mean that this project. Ideally can work with the age of platform to provide the attraction for the edge devices so this is something I can figure out from their documentation but I actually asked several maintainers. For example, could be age. So the mission is that they do have intention to have this into integration with this project. They're still there require a lot of effort so they still have no plan to begin to put effort to implement it. But ideally, I think that's the relationship of those projects. Okay, that makes sense. And I like the write up that we had for how is your project aligned with the cloud native computing system. You know that I like how they worded it. Any red flags anybody else. How many red flags I think it's good start especially for sandbox, something that seems tangible. Okay it seems well defined and good place to find out how much interest there is. Nothing else. To similar lessons to be available seems. Take it to a vote then. Right, the vote is open. We can move on. Metal LB. Did they come to us before or what did you tell them earlier, if anybody remembers the remissing the remissing one of the documents that you require either roadmap or something or something else. Yep. That's right. It was a while ago. Well it wasn't. It was a single maintainer or something they wanted to just hand it over so it could grow. I couldn't tell if they had a lot of momentum behind maintaining it. Yeah, the main term wants to step down as an is gone away basically. So, bringing it here would definitely help. And it is being used by a bunch of people for sure. Yeah, nobody will step up to be maintainers. I'm a little worried about taking on a project with no maintainers. If the main, if the maintainers goal of joining is so that they can step away as a destined for a slow death, and they not look for new maintainers before that. They have I believe they have a set of people that are interested. Okay, but you know interesting actually doing the work when they hit CNCF is slightly different right so it is not a very it's a great that's actually a great product, but it's not a very project contribution. I can see. So, I was asking some people about this. The other one is the open LB and Q with is in the similar space. But definitely that the Cappy folks for bare metal, a whole bunch of people including red hat and be aware they're using it for using metal LB. So from that point of view, it has adopters. The question is, when they hit CNCF, how many of them will actually help out with maintenance stuff. Yeah, I wonder if this is a chicken and egg problem of it's not part of the CNCF and isn't getting contributions that kind of thing. Yeah, I'm not hearing a call for a vote, but I'm also not sure where to be able to. What to do with this. I think my two senses from everything I hear it is a popular project in terms of usage that I think I share the same set of concerns around adoption. But given kind of sandbox, one of the purposes to encourage more contribute contributors and allow folks to collaborate. I think I would give it a thumbs up. To find the current list of maintainers. There are four maintainers. It's in the metal LB repository under code owners. So they have four people right now already. And they have a doc that has a, you know, how, what do they look for when adding new maintenance and removing old maintainers so they have some some of these already set up. So I think I'll call for a word. Yeah, I mean all the four maintainers and the original author for voted to submit to CNCF so I think it's there's a willingness to. Right, they pass. We can move on. Oh goodness, our next one is this gigantic serverless steps one. Let me see if I can't like, somehow get it's being able to share this because it is so huge. Yeah, this is pretty much unfortunately the best I can do right now I'm very sorry. Dave for the previous word you messaged me. I'm on my phone and the meeting and on my computer in the spreadsheet. So, I don't know how the phone app decides who I messaged but it passed regardless. If that happens again just let me know. I just thought it really wanted to message Alina but I caught that. Okay, that's great. All right, I will just make sure that I'm checking for you as well. So for service. For serverless devs, the main thing that I saw was that the whatever they're doing is very specific to the Alibaba platform and not, they don't work on any other public cloud. I don't know if anybody else got that same. It isn't there with me. So it's pretty. Yeah. And the website is 100% Chinese. I mean we've previously turned down projects that don't run on on an open source backend. I only run on cloud services cloud services as a as a kind of principle. I mean, what's what's our policy regarding like localization stuff so if you're clicking to the issues, I mean another whole lot of issues but but but every issues in Chinese as well. I don't think there's anything formal that like we require everything to be English. Okay, but generally you know if you want to build kind of an inclusive community you want to support I think multiple languages right. Okay, I won't hold it against them that their stuff isn't Chinese already, but definitely the cloud single cloud is way more. It's going to be then the language. We could ask them to present to serverless working group and, you know, get a little bit more information from them and, you know, say that it's a little bit hard for the to see to follow due to the language right now, I think that could be a good idea. Plus one to that Chris. I was also asking them about their single cloud platform and whether they have any intentions to support intentions plans ideas on how they're going to support others. In their application they mentioned that once they come to CNCF with CNCF help they'll make it multi cloud or something to that effect, which is not a good feeling. All right, I'm happy to leave the comment at presenting towards serverless worker group and then clarifying that single cloud platform issue and kind of what the roadmap is. Yeah, okay. I can move us on to Carmada. This is from Huawei I think. They wrote Q fed one and two and based on that they, they did whatever they're doing here in Carmada. What's the relationship of this visa could be fed. I'm just wondering. Anyone know some background. Sorry, can you repeat that Harry I couldn't catch the first. Because in the meantime there is could be fed at the, I think it's Kubernetes sake project right so are they the same or next generation, something like that. Q, both Q fed one and two were kind of like Huawei projects. You know, was really bad and two was slightly better but nobody's taking care of Q fed anymore. Once the Huawei folks stepped away. I think, you know, we are in the process of mothballing it. The big multi cluster is not even looking at Q fed for the for the longest time. So, you know, I'm, I'm okay with the concepts that they had in B2 ended up in Carmada is what I got from reading through in general I'm supportive of multiple clusters, kind of stuff. I think it's a reasonably active project seems seems like seems like people are developing and then using it. So, it's an important topic to address not a lot of good solutions. It seems okay to me. As an expert as another experiment in this direction it's some, you know, I think we should encourage experiments especially if there's ones that haven't worked in the past when people need to experiment more. I would also say something like that as a user of view one and then I'm quite excited about it. It's definitely ambitious, looking at the column, all the things that they want to integrate with it's everything under the sun. I don't know how much that is actually done. This is maybe a dumb question but I think in a previous project there was a question raised about whether it should be a Kubernetes sub project. Is that a consideration here or how do we decide that. Because it's built on like Federation. Right. Yeah, it seems like it's. Yeah, and it's very very closely tied to Kubernetes and Kubernetes alone. So, that's why they expand upon the alignment to the other things, but I mean I guess you could also say you wouldn't have any of those extensibility points if you didn't have Kubernetes is the basis so you can see that. The other point here also is the one and two was mostly around like deploying and controlling clusters. And now they're talking about way more different things, rather than just the. How do we treat all multiple clusters from a single command line kind of thing. Yeah, so one of the way I can think about it as like it is way beyond the scope of, say the sync multi cluster in Kubernetes so they won't fit under one sync specifically. Got it. Okay. This was actually a common question for, for a bit of already which state should it be. Right. Yeah, it makes sense. You are using the queue fed to write Ricardo. We will use the one we tried to really. Yeah, I guess we call for a word then. Okay, we can move on with that go zero Karmada's past. And go zero. Web and RPC framework written and go. I couldn't see any overlap directly with CNCF projects was my concern. Although it says it's deeply integrated with Kubernetes. I couldn't really see any specific integration. So what kind of thing of what tool. We would have that would be even similar type of add on. No, we don't have anything that's the things are very different area. I mean, I think that it's a application application developer framework I mean there's a little looking at it there's a little bit of it does generate qbm all files for deployment but it's fairly developer focused. It mentions go micro as it's kind of racist similar thing which I looked at a little bit a while back. It's kind of like sick apps to see sick apps is to perhaps comment on whether they think this is the kind of given as a new kind of thing whether it's the kind of thing they feel is appropriate for CNCF. They have 11,000 stars. I mean usually anything that now targets developers, you have to get more stars. Yeah, fundamentally larger user base. Of course, because it's framework. I also noticed something. I don't know if we reflect. If you look at their documentation. The mission that the documentation is machine translated by Google. I don't know if this is a red flag. It seems that they actually only write Chinese version maybe. I don't know. Anybody mentioned it but if you look at the issues in the repository. It is all in Chinese like I cannot, I cannot read the titles. So it's also, I think has some issue, maybe for the diverse of the languages. I'm not sure if it's a red flag but for the documentation I think it's not, it's not, it's not, I do not feel very good to see this is a machine translate. They can even, I think hide all of this English version they can just provide Chinese I think it's okay. But nobody can read this English version honestly speaking. So, ask them to talk to tag apps. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I agree. Right. I have a note for present tag app delivery so we can get a little bit more sense of what's going on in here. Let me bring us to our next one. Looks like it's in clever containers. This is a trust RunC compatible runtime for running in Intel SGX. A lot of the case derived from RunC. So it kind of fits in that. I haven't looked at it in a lot of detail yet. They are having to pour all the fixes for RunC CVS into it which is kind of, I was just a bit concerned about there. How are they going to manage maintaining it given it's so closely derived from RunC but their base is just cut and pasted the code rather than reusing it which is just somewhat concerning. There is a joint effort between Alibaba and Intel right now so there are multiple companies involved at least. Yeah, that is the case. It's a joint effort of Intel. I have stable other hardware providers I believe. So one question I had here is what kind of, you know, hardware does it need to run. Is it, you know, how do people simulate or try or test or build code for this platform or this project? Right, so it does not require specific, I mean, some special hardware but it should be hardware to support Intel, I think a GTX or something like that. So it exists in every vanilla Intel CPU server but maybe not your old machine. Yeah, sorry, GTX. Yeah, I mean, yeah, not, you have to find the right machines. Yes, right machine. So it's not targeted for, I don't think it's targeted for normal developers to play with. Some, you know, big platform or something like that. Or some, for example, bank, they have bought the Intel, they have bought the Intel SGX supported machines. All right, asking that question because, you know, how will they get contributors if people won't have access to the hardware, right? So I think this is, my guess of this project, it's mostly targeted for cloud environment. So basically, if you want to play with a whole stack, you need to buy a machine or buy an instance from the cloud. That is how this project is targeting. Except that there's almost no cloud providers that provide access to machines with SGX. Apparently, there might be some early access in Microsoft and you can get SGX in Alibaba, but you can't get it anywhere else. What do we expect it to be coming at other service providers? I mean, I love the idea of having this, this runtime on the specialized hardware, if the hardware is going to become more widely available. It depends if they're going to provide it as SGX available to the user or potentially as a service that runs in SGX managed by the cloud provider. Or whether SGX is just dead because it's the number of security vulnerabilities in it are too high and no one's really going to ship it, which is the other option. Because that's, I mean, and everyone's going to wait for next generation. Harry, are all the contributors from Alibaba or are they contributors from Intel too? The users are diverse from Intel, Alibaba, multiple companies. So personally, my personal feeling of this project is good. It actually involves a lot of the company, including I think Vim there, a lot of folks who are working with this era. I think the only issue is whether we believe, for example, Intel, Intel's technology is industry standard, or it's not, right? So besides that, I think the project itself is quite open and have a very straightforward user value to me. There's only two maintainers, one from Alibaba and one from Intel. Yeah, and the contributors are from multiple companies. I just take a look at that part. So I think that is a good side. It means that anybody who's working on this kind of technology are trying to work in collaboration, trying to collaborate on this project. This is a good side to me. So I think the only issue is for whether we want to, you know, adopt a project which targets specifically on Intel SGX. Yeah, I guess I'm curious if there's a similar thing either on whatever I think AWS calls it Nitro and AMD has their own thing. So if there's like an AWS project, an AMD project in an Intel one, and we accept the Intel one now, that's different to me than if there's only an Intel one. Nitro isn't actually in hardware, isn't a hardware trusted execution environment per se or at well, or partly it is, but I think mostly it was not an NCPU one because it's not. Yeah, AMD and ARM obviously. Yeah, ARM is working on this stuff as well. And they're all, yeah, they're all currently independent. So maybe ignore what I said about Nitro. But there, there's, I mean, the trusted computing foundation has projects that abstract over them. If I remember correctly, I think Microsoft has a project that abstracts over different CAs. And I kind of care is why they decided to put this to CNCF rather than trust computing foundation, which is perhaps more, more logical. Call for a vote. I guess I'm feeling to give them the benefit of doubt. What is sandbox. It's kind of a new area. So it's interesting. Dave, did you send it to someone else too. No, this time I didn't. I can send it to you. I'm also willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, I guess. We can move on. We've talked about Pogtato head and I think I'm going to move on. So cloud based framework. I think it had the same issue with the most of the docs being on Chinese. I guess this one goes to the ag apps too. I actually has a note here to ask if English is a requirement. I would like to see to gap review it because it's a, yeah, it's, again, we, we, it's a, it seems to be a very opinion as your framework and we haven't done that previously. In the interest of time, I will mark that as tag app delivery and we can move on to T base comments on T base. Yeah, I think that's it. Aaron explanation somewhere of why they want to be in the CNCF it's not in the stock that they provided separately. I don't believe so. Well, they, I mean, they, they filled out that column but it says really nothing about the cloud. Oh, yeah. I was, I'm sorry, I was referring to the question around, how does this contribute to the cloud native and didn't didn't say a single thing about cloud native. And I had a question about licensing to I think the BSD three, probably because I don't know what is postgres postgres has its own license. And the work is based on postgres. I don't pay stress with BSD. How about your own. Similar to BSD or MIT. I think it's fine but I'll double check there's generally no issues. We may have to get that approved. But the larger question is, how does the database fit into what we are doing here. I mean if it were a cloud native database and it was talking about cloud capabilities and leveraging some of the other cloud native principles and sure it would fit but it just looks like a database and even when you look at the some of the competitors those are those are not cloud native databases I don't know all of them but I wouldn't consider it cloud native. So that'll be unclear what has happened to postgres excel and what their relationship is. One thing that I have concerns is this project not as active as a database should be. It seems very required. In terms of the committee's issue in the pro request, which I do have concerns things like I worry about this could be or it's maybe a, you know, just a project that open source code. It could be very active and kind of, you know, healthy community behind it. This is one thing that country was the most. They commit directly to the master so I think your observation is is correct. It doesn't look like it's it's it's very it's very inclusive and transparent to external contributors. I think ask them to apply after a year or whatever. Because I, I guess we tell them that we don't see how they fit into CNCF specifically. And if they reconsider some of the things that they're doing. And maybe apply later. Yeah, we should we should recommend to revise our github management practices. And with what is recommended for the open source projects. A dim six months is our usual for being able to reapply. Is that okay with you. Yeah, I think so. But more importantly, when they come back to us, they can't submit exactly the same thing they should show more how it fits into CNCF. Maybe things, I guess. That's fine. Okay. We can move on. Our next one is super edge. Oh, so these are the folks that listed VMware as a supporter and I tried to find evidence for it internally and I couldn't. But I think, other than that, they seem fine to me. You carried every VMware employee in China. That's what it's working. In general, I'm supportive of all the experiments that is going on on the edge. This, I like the, you know, how they are trying to do the light API server on the edge node, talking back to the Kubernetes API server. So it's something that, you know, some some other folks are exploding as well. They did a really nice job and their submission. There were lots of great answers. Thoughtful. I don't have any objections to it. It seems like it has a good trajectory, especially as a sandbox. And the alignment overlap with existing CNCF projects, they've really made a good effort there also. All for a vote. We can move on. We've got cube director. So this one, I think blue director was a company that sorry blue kids was a company that got acquired by HP. And it's been with an HP for a while and now they are trying to open source it. That's the background that I could figure out. Have they gone to the tag apps, or just the SIG, like, was that a long time ago. I don't say the same thing here. I don't know HP. I have, you know, they've done open source and fits and starts and I'm not too sure about how large their commitment to this is going to be, I guess. But yes, plus one to ask about time apps. Bring no objections. I will have them present towards tag app delivery. Yeah, the other red flag that I can see is in the contributor graph in the top two or four contributors haven't done any work for the longest time. So it might be in maintenance mode and they just want to home. Can we send a sandbox application over to one of the tags. Oftentimes what I'm hearing us say is we have specific concerns that we would like to have have the tag help us flesh out. Do we provide that level of detail over to the tag and say here's some concerns that we're looking at or because I'm concerned that they go and present and if they haven't addressed the concerns that we're talking about, then are we back to square one they've done what we've asked them to do and now we're still like well we still have open questions. So I guess here the specific question is like around how much ongoing work and what is the roadmap. And if this is something that we see fit well into, I guess it fits well because it's given it as I guess that could be the answer we get. Yeah, it feels to me like it's, is there going to be continued ongoing substantial development of this. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. For the comments on keep director. During none, I will move us on to cloud pods. This seems like a multi cloud management platform, not a, not really a Kubernetes or container. There's some verbiage in the last column. Oh, that's a unified is open stack. Somebody's proposed an open source open stack. I'm kind of concerned about these giant monolithic projects that are trying to do so much. It isn't it isn't it really ties together is platform. Yes, I think it's something grow in the structure industry. And another thing I have concern is if you look at the get up all I think there is a business company behind that and so I'm not sure if this is actually their core product or something like that. I think there is also a question regarding to that part I don't know if they answer this in the submission part. I will have concern for this is their core product and then they don't need it since it will concern me a lot. And what on earth does cloud pods have to do with the name cloud pods have to do with infrastructure as a service, not finding that connection. So what they're saying is they are running on Kubernetes. They have CRDs. So technically they are, you know, they have the 12 factor apps, whatever, and they are able to manage. Not just came in bare metal but also like if any of the clouds provide bare metal machines then they can people can use stitch them together to to deploy Kubernetes on that I guess. I don't know. And VMware vSphere and they have their own I am model and they have. I mean it's, it's a lot of pieces. Yeah, it sounds like they're trying to bite off a lot and you know having, I think one of the areas they're talking about is like object storage and having worked with a cozy project that's trying to do that just for object and seeing how difficult it is I kind of question how viable it is to tackle even more than that. Before this we should say, you know, go talk to the next foundation and set up something at that level rather than come to us. Yeah, I mean, always happy to chat with them. Okay, during no objections. What I believe I'm hearing is this is likely something bigger than just a CNC F project. All right, we can move on in the last few minutes here. We've got a C++ workflow. Yeah, I don't understand this much. Had they presented before is my imagination. Yeah, I don't believe so. Okay, or nothing in my memory is telling me that they presented before. I personally always think that we've, I think we should for now hold this kind of a business logic workflow I'm not sure if it actually alive is the CNC project. The directional goal for now, we may want to discuss that about this. I, so this is actually another workflow workflow engine for developers to build a business logic thing like that. I don't even want to send them to bag apps. Yeah. Yeah, the explanation to contribute doesn't really fit on how it enhances the ecosystem either. I guess we go back to the standard thing of like come back after six months and hope they go away. I think I'm hearing here is that this is perhaps not as aligned with cloud native from the application as you would expect. Yeah. And I think being able to say hey reapply in six months around being able to show like how this fits in CNC F is perfectly fine. And the risk of being able to do like one more. We can come back to this one lagoon. And then I remember it. There's an open source component and there is stuff that is proprietary in house and it's all mixed jointed the hip and they're trying to separate it out. That that was something that I could gather. So they have a service and the open source codes, I think it still depends on the service. Well, that's been a hard no from us. If it's a requires diesel service and there's no alternative. So they need to fix that. And I think that's a good policy. The hard no for those things. So in the last column, they do say no one still has work to do to make the project itself less amazing.io centric. And we address some of the major challenges and so on. Yeah, this is come back after six months once you have addressed everything I guess. Yep. In the interest of time I am not going to try to move us on. We will pick up with open ELB, which is a reapplication in our next meeting two months from now is going to be November 9. Yes, November. So we will come back to this November 9 and go through the rest of the list in here. Thank you all. Thank you very much. Thank you.