 Do you want to join us that? Yeah, let's let's get started. I think Taylor's got the got the deck We'll just quickly go to In terms of TOC members present. I think I have every Everyone but Brian Grant and Kelsey right now, so seven out of nine, but we'll I'll check before The meeting is over for others and we got a lot of outgoing folks here today too, but um, you know the You know rough agenda today's we're gonna discuss the election results both You know incoming new TOC members and provide some time for outgoing to see members to make some comments Talk a little bit about D&I and the TOC congratulate core DNS and graduation talk about CNC of SIGs And a bit of our community backlog. So I'll steer it over for you, Alexis If you kind of want to go through these next next slides Sure, I mean, I think they speak for themselves. Welcome everybody to this unique hand over TOC session Congratulations core DNS Just want to remark that Several people have commented that now is a good time for us to review our graduation criteria The current intent is that it's pretty easy to get into sandbox and there's no marketing associated with it And then getting into incubation is pretty high hurdle with quite a bit of DD and then graduation should cover off more Things around, you know, community where the governance is in place and non technical criteria However, I think that there's an emerging view that we do need to Validate some technical criteria during the final graduation step. And so I refer you to the mailing list discussion about that Please pay attention to that discussion and contribute. I think over the next few months We need to find some time to review the graduation criteria Not by very much, but by a bit Okay, next slide, please Summer of code, please apply next slide, please Conferences Chris, what are we saying about this right now? Schedule will be out soon. Thank you for everyone on the program committee. That's reviewing but yeah, here are three main events for the year CFP open CFP will open for China soon. Chris. Can you please look into the amount of work that the reviewers are doing? I received some back channel complaints from a few people saying that they felt Very very overloaded with many many hundreds of things to review in a very short space of time And remarkably few cookies to justify it. Okay, we'll do. Thank you. Next slide, please Yep, annual report. We just released it yesterday So feel free to take a look at it basically covers everything we did in 2018 from helping projects Objects events, you know maintainer satisfaction and then so on so please take a look and if you have any comments on how to improve it Let us know we tried to include a lot more data this year good stuff Okay, next slide election results. I take it everybody has seen these Please shout now if you have any questions about this anybody very good. Welcome to these new people I hope you're all on the call Okay, I believe this is the moment where we say thank you to the outgoing TOC members Chris, what's the protocol here? Yeah, so, you know, my thing is, you know First, you know, thanks and you know, give people some time to to make kind of, you know Any comments or advice they want to give for the kind of new to see based on their experience. I know Ben Ben is on I think some others are on also. So it's the kind of stages theirs to Make any comments Sure. What's your advice? What's your advice, Chris? Do you want to kind of call on us in turn or does anyone else want to say anything? Brunt Kentrell you you volunteered yourself Yeah, so congratulations to the new to see obviously, I think it's a terrific to see and I'm excited to see Excited was excited to see so many qualified people run for election and excited to see obviously a trivially Well qualified to see elected The the one piece of advice I would give is well, hope is the best I guess I think for each of you that are coming in on the TOC Try to figure out what you want to get done in the next What they've got everyone's on a two-year term, right? I can't remember if we I think that yeah And so try to figure out what you really want to get done over the next two years And I think it's actually important to have have an agenda I'm not I mean not not that you should subvert other things don't have a hidden agenda But have have goals that you want to achieve because I think it's it's easy to I'm I feel that Honestly, personally, I think we lose you Brian There were just things that that didn't end up happening for other reasons So I would say have an idea of what you really want to achieve and what you want the CNCF to be I think one open question is is the CNCF Gonna be the Kubernetes Foundation and that wasn't the original intent But you know, maybe that's and maybe that's something we've overly resisted or we overly resisted on the outgoing TOC But something to kind of consider And then the other thing I would say is so have a kind of a clear idea of what you want to get done The other thing I would say is there are a lot of financial resources available It or should be that should be available to the CNCF the CNCF is brought in a lot of member companies And think about how you can put that money to work and Chris has been Chris has been really good about about helping I think us brainstorm ways But there are lots of things that we should be able to go do that are not just conferences To actually aid I think the most core constituencies which are the actual communities of users and developers Not just the immediate constituency of the government board So those would be my two pieces of advice, but again congratulations to everybody and I guess actually well I actually will add one final piece of advice. I think it's really important to have a diversity of thought on the TOC And I think that you want to as you are looking towards your TOC elected member I would encourage you to kind of look at look for someone that's gonna bring in a New perspective a different perspective because I think a couple of times over we really appreciated having very different perspectives and having pretty different backgrounds and coming to problems from different backgrounds definitely the most rewarding bit for me was Getting to know and working with my fellow TOC members who I really enjoyed so thanks to all of them and without all adios Thanks, Brian Any anyone else on the parting side want to make some comments? I mean I do I do echo Brian's comment on It is very easy to It's very easy for the group particularly when it is made up entirely of people who work for companies providing You know these products for financial, you know as as vendors essentially To really lose track of what people who are not Who are not working for those companies? Really actually need and want and so you know make sure you're really making a lot of time to get that perspective because There's a big echo chamber effect right now. I think that You really have to fight very hard against and you know if you want to make this a successful broad and sort of diverse Foundation it's going to be an important thing to continue to seek out Thanks Camille Anyone else? I know Ben is here If not, I think that's it. I just want to say thanks. I think CNCF You know was definitely incredibly different organization a few years ago and a lot of these folks But a lot of time to kind of get it where it was so we're all super appreciative of their effort So Alexis I will Give it back to you to kind of discuss the next topic Thanks everybody. I particularly wanted to say thank you to everybody who did the TOC, but also ask them to Don't go away. Please stay with us if you can We'd really need your help with all kinds of things. We don't know what that all of them are yet So please please offer help to people who want to come into the TOC as contributors or community or in the SIGs It's very important to have continuity So the chair election, I am I could not be more relieved to see this slide I have to say it's been quite a lot of emotional Costs doing this thing, but I'm really excited to see some strong names in the hat. It's not too late to Nominate yourself if you're one of the handful of people who can so do better than in mind Any questions about this and the timing the schedule in Chris? Do you want to just talk us through the dates? Yeah, yeah, I mean basically my goal is to kick off the election today Obviously if there's any other TOC members that want to run, please let me know before the end of this meeting and then I'll kick off the election and have it run until Monday next week and then we'll be ready for the new TOC chair for the February 19th meeting so Chris, sorry, just a quick question. I'm sorry. This is a bit of a late chime in from me Given that we have a seat up for election in the next few weeks I was wondering whether we want to make it possible for that person to run for this chair position Well, no, you want to handle that. Yeah, I'm not a host I think it's fine for you know for for you to run in my opinion And if we go to a point where that person is no longer there and we need a new chair then we do a new chair election Okay, and just to be clear. I wasn't actually Talking about myself running or not I was actually more referring to the person who may replace me soon Makes sense for them to be able to be the chair. Oh, I would probably kick off a new election Okay, it's not I mean, I think what it does is if we do it now It means we kind of have to do it again in a month because there's another candidate So I don't know let's maybe figure that out I think we're useful to be able to make that a possibility that the new Member could become the chair. Well, I mean the beauty is it's it's kind of the Tita The TOC to decide here on that one, but we'll take that privately. Okay Yeah, make sense. Thank you Hey next slide please Taylor if you're there Okay, Chris back to you Yeah, so, you know, there was a lot of you know, I'm sure discussion in the last, you know Think week since we've you know nominate and elected the need new TOC You know, we have had a lot of private discussion amongst the current set of TOC on ways of you know, essentially improving the situation where We're at a point where we have elected, you know There's nine men on the TOC and definitely it's not reflective of kind of the wider community that we have here so The TOC is looking to explore a kind of essentially other ways to expand the diversity and kind of all parts of the CNCF Governing structure. There has been discussions on proposing specific changes on the allocation of TOC seats. Right now we kind of have this structure where six of them are elected by the governing board Two are elected by the TOC themselves and one is elected by the end user community We've had discussions of you know, essentially giving a little bit more variety to that where maybe there are less governing board selected seats more end user seats Maybe seats representing developers and maintainers. We're still essentially having these discussions and plan to bring it up to the board on in March when the next board meeting is You know at the moment we have a TOC selected seat that becomes available in March that we plan on electing You know someone new potentially But right now I just kind of wanted to let the community know that we've heard a lot of folks concerns and are essentially kind of opening up Ask the community on you know, what they think and Essentially opening up the the mic for for comments and of course if any other TOC members kind of want to chime in on discussion They're more than welcome welcome to That's not about right. Alexis Yeah, I mean a few folks on the TOC incoming had some strong views on this. Would you want to Speak up on it. I think this is an incredibly important topic I mean just I mean for the record. I think all of us, you know You hold an election you get results you look at and you're like, how did we end up here? and so now we're in a position of All right, what do we do about it now and so, you know our lines of control here are limited Um, so we're gonna do what we can but I think we we want to let folks know that You know, it doesn't end there. So I think that's the intent here. I think exactly How we go about that how hard we push when we push is something that I think we're gonna have to be figuring out over over the coming weeks Thank you Okay, please come on the next slide Any comments from the community by the way before we rush rush through Hey, I was uh, one quick question. This is Jeff. Um, the Have there been discussions with the governing board itself about the diversity topic and is there I mean, are we waiting way to march to find out or or is there recognition there that that there's a That there's a problem as well We have brought it up to some governing board members At least staff has there hasn't been a formal discussion between say the toc and the governing board essentially You know, the way it works is we would be looking for a proposal From, you know, the toc potentially on how they would want to change The toc structure, uh, for example But it's definitely slotted for discussion in march at the march board meeting Great Hey, chris, uh, alexis dims here. So, uh, is the plan to take a specific proposal to the governing board For that meeting or the discussion is going to start there when you get to the burning governing board Uh, it'll be up to the toc how they want to essentially do this There's been already some proposals from, you know, folks like brian grant and others and how to structure things But um, I still think there it's in the discussion phase You know, if we have a proposal to the governing board, they'll probably have to discuss it themselves Then there's a vote and then so on. So these things take, you know, usually a bit of time just due to, you know kind of governance and process because updating The charter essentially will be like a super majority vote of the governing board So it'll take a little bit of of time to discuss that Got it. Thank you Okay Onto the sigs presentation Quinton, why don't you take us through there since you are the editor of the doc at this point Sure, um, actually just really was a was a cleaner upper of the doc. I think alexis actually was the one who started this conversation and The bulk of the work. Um, but yeah, there's a document out there essentially Um, uh, I think many people have weighed in on it already. Uh, it sketches out a plan for creating cncf special interest groups Um, the goal, you know, as written on the slides there is is basically to help the toc to scale in its ability to Serve its duties And provide value to both the project and the end users of cncf technology Um, I won't go through all the details now, but basically the these things would be created by the toc um, and they would Provide Expertise these sort of valued experts in particular fields To help the toc to evaluate projects To educate end users And provide a various variety of other services that require You know expertise knowledge in particular domains um If you can maybe flip to the following slide These are the proposed initial sigs The thinking was to try and keep this list relatively limited at least to start with So that we don't end up with a kind of a six ball situation where we have large numbers of sigs A significant percentage of which are not very effective. So the aim was to start with a short list Um, and and even within that list start with perhaps Two or three of the highest priority ones get those working and effective And then move on to create the additional ones and perhaps split some of these sigs if they turn out to be Too large in terms of their scope And there are a couple that stand out there as as being you know, pretty big The second last one in particular core and applied architectures covers Quite a lot of ground. So we might consider splitting that at some point um Yeah, uh, if anyone has any questions, perhaps we can just dwell on this slide for One minute. I know there were some questions around Which projects get allocated to which areas whether the naming of the areas is Appropriate, uh, just to be clear these names are not finalized. Uh, absolutely expect that the sigs themselves will uh wordsmith some of these Names and make sure that the Scope of each one of these sigs is very clearly articulated um But yeah, if anyone has any questions around this slide now is probably a good time to chime in Quentin, this is matt farina When I look at this I see the cncfci Which is a current working group listed under the app dev ops and testing But if I look at a lot of what's in that ci group, I see things like Um testing kubernetes across different clouds Prometheus, yes, that's that's something that we try to clarify in the original version that may have gotten munged The cncfci group will not be part of this sig. It's a separate thing associated with testing Um, I think we need to look at ci cd pipelines and workflows as Either part of app dev or my preference a separate sig From app dev and focus on app dev on application types But that's a that's a conversation we can have offline. But to your question cncfci is not part of this sig Okay, it just listed that way in the list, which is all I was curious about the other parts I agree with you on being here. It was the cncfci element sitting here So it should probably be broken out as a eighth or how do I get we got six seventh one Is the plan? Yeah, we can we can definitely figure that out. Uh, my preference there we're intended to tonight Denote that this was a kind of a different situation than the other project Okay, that's all I was noting Yeah, so I mean I I've been catching up on this because I hadn't been paying attention to the doc until I was uh I'm like, oh, I gotta I gotta pay more attention to the toc stuff now. And so I gave it a A read through and I think it's great. I did have some questions And I don't have all the history so I can take the stuff offline if y'all want but um I I noticed like for example that multiple times through the document the phrase unbiased is used And I think you know, I look at this with some of the comments coming from like brian and cameo And I'm wondering is there anything as a toc that we can do to try and put some meat on the bones of what does unbiased actually mean How do we enforce that and I do know that like, you know looking outside of our little bubble There are folks who have very strong opinions about the cncf And uh, and would say that there's nothing unbiased about what we do I don't think that that's true, but I'm just wondering if so and maybe that's a larger issue Beyond just the the sig stuff here. Um Yeah, I totally agree with you and and maybe this is not we don't have enough time to Yeah, uh justice to the topic what I can say is there are some words in the document which hopefully go towards that which is that We feel we've articulated that we would like we we have this theory that that you know, the rising tide raises all boats And that our aim is to rise the tide which which involves Basically increasing adoption of cloud native technologies not Not to benefit one project over another or one vendor over another but to raise the tide and I I personally think that's a fairly useful metaphor to encapsulate this unbiased idea But yeah certainly further discussion and input most welcome and valued I think yeah, and I think maybe we can have a Different and separate discussion about that at some point. Um, yeah, but the other things that I think are are You know one year terms for the for the chairs of the sigs with staggered That means we're always going to be having elections Um, I don't know if there's been thought put into that but that that implies an election every six months for every sig Yeah, I have the same question. Uh, well every yeah every six months for every other sig But yeah, we could we could expand that to two years. Uh, I don't think that would be a major problem Okay, so every six months for every Other sig No, we'd want to have like for any particular sig. We want to have some continuity of chairs, right? That means that every sig will have an election every six months if we if we oh, yes Sorry, you're correct. Absolutely. Yeah as it's written and yes, I agree. That's dubious I'm just like I know how much work goes into these elections and and it probably you know, it'll probably fall on On on on chris and uh and others that this seems you have to do. Well, yeah I mean just just to be clear, um the the proposal as it stands at the moment is that the toc basically approves the chairs um and selects them in in consultation with the sig and the and the um sig chairs at the time so, you know in practice, they're three chairs, uh, you know, they're gonna want to replace one or two of them every, uh, year um Or sorry every six months and yeah, I'm not sure how heavy weight that process will in practice be it's not quite the same as You know having a board of directors elect, you know, eight seats on on on the toc. This is Yeah Yeah, I think the original intent was that they would be um They would be two year terms for the first term Two of this would be one year migraine Yeah, that makes sense. I mean The other side of it is, you know, do you want chairs that that are, you know Ineffective fairly quickly and then, you know, sit around for two years or 18 months, whatever But yeah, we can we can figure that out. I I agree that longer terms might be more appropriate And then my final comment and then I'll shut up On this slide here with the with the list of sigs These are all so like when we think about sort of Who are the sort of constituencies for the cncf broadly? There's, you know, vendors which dominates the governing board Part of our job here is to look at the community and the projects this This is all focused around the the projects Um, is there a thought and I think the cnc the the ci stuff is is is sort more meta Uh, and I think, you know plays into that Are there ideas around sort of sigs that are more community focused more user focused? Yeah versus just project focused Um, and I'm thinking in terms of things that are cross cutting because like one of the I think the Critical sigs in kubernetes is is the contributor experiencing which ends up being a bit of a Of a kitchen sink where we dump a lot of stuff in there But it is this idea of like how do we actually build efficiencies across the project versus just focusing on single technical issues? Yeah, um brief brief response to that. Um, so So I don't I don't actually think that these sigs are as Project focused as they may come across what we had to Assign projects to sigs just because you know that that was part of the intention of these sigs But if you look at the at the actual names and the areas they cover, they're not actually designed To fit projects. They're actually designed to fulfill end user requirements Um, and to whatever extent that may not have been achieved. We should perhaps look at at Changing things, but the intention was this is how You know end users think about some of the space And we would like them to be able to you know, figure out which of these areas Is the most interesting to them or where to Focus their attention. Okay. So then my suggestion would be as we present this to a wider audience Um, we start with sort of like, you know, what is this sig about? Maybe a paragraph and then the set of project is a sub bullet of that So it's like, you know, we provide more detail more color beyond just the set of projects to actually It won't get on a slide anymore, but like maybe that's an okay thing. Yeah, all right. I'll step back now. Thanks So I think Matt before you chime in. I think there was one other question. Was it Yes, hi. This is Jerry Jennings Um, so I guess I was hoping that the toc could clarify Your view of the near term path forward for this proposal, um in particular In the near term, I think it would be great if there was an opportunity for more people to be able to comment The last I checked as I emailed about The comments were turned off on the word doc, which might be fine. Um, but is this going to be Added in a pr to the toc repo so that people can add comments to the pr and How does it going to move forward so that then the sigs that are proposed can start working on The work that they have to do to define whether the naming is correct and stuff like that Yeah, sure. So the next slide actually deals with precisely those points Regarding comments the doctors to be clear this doc has been out in the open and distributed on toc public mailing lists since november So, you know, I had assumed that uh, November of december of january like a lot of the people who wanted to make input already have If there's anyone, you know, and at some point we have to That it's been out for long enough and we're going to close it for comments If if now is not the appropriate time for that, uh, we can certainly extend the comment area It the document became extremely unwieldy because there were hundreds and hundreds of comments And and it took a long time to kind of put everything back together again So I would I would prefer if we can uh to to limit the Doing that all over again But if if there is a need to provide more comments, there have been a few via email in the last few days And I think those were very well received and hopefully Fulfilled some of the needs That was part of the reason that I was asking because since the comments were closed the naming of the security related seg was changed to governance Um, and I just want to make sure that anything else that is outstanding like that people are able to provide that feedback And if it makes sense to to do it once the document is pretty much finalized and there's just maybe a handful of comments That's why I thought maybe a github issue With the pr associated to it might be easier. I don't really know but Yeah, I think that makes absolute sense. It should certainly transition from a document to a to a something in github Hey, we should do that. Can we I mean can we do that now? Is there anything stopping us doing it now? I don't believe there is no Let's let's do that as a next step, please Sounds good Um, I think we can go into linear comments at this point given the nature of for example, joe's comments and the ones that were just cited We don't need to have a document model anymore. We can we need to push this to votable state as soon as possible Yeah, I think maybe the next line for One minute would be useful and matt did you have another question or comment? Uh, well, yeah, I was just gonna to suggest. I think there's a lot of contacts here that um, a lot of folks don't have on this like uh, quentin you went through and um, Curated literally over a hundred comments on this because it was so heavily discussed and brought that down Um, but when we look at it like this this displayed, uh, the sigs that would be under it And and there's contacts like the sigs don't have any authority over the projects, right because we We talked about that and and I think that may even be expressly in there now But that is one of the details and a lot of what these sigs do Uh, if you look at the responsibilities has nothing to do with the projects It's actually things to um gather information to kind of reach out to the community and to give information out So there's a whole bunch in there if you haven't read it yet Uh, that talks about those things and one thing that hasn't been worked out I think if I remember right there's the end user group and that uh, Cheryl handles and she talked about sigs and forums and other things over there That projects and others can be a part of to try to get more of that end user stuff So there's other things going on in the cncf to try to get to it These sigs are not the end all be all but there's a whole lot going on hold up matt okay We are still figuring out What the end user sigs exact relationship with these TOC sigs needs to be The reason being that there are some end users who are asking to work on specific areas like security Okay, so there's a group of banks that want to work on banking security So that's going to overlap between the end user world and the technical world So please everyone be a little patient while um, you know Cheryl's getting up to speed on setting up her basic structures And then we can we can take that on as a job after that to together across the organization um, also Please please Go on So Alexis just wanted to chime in and say that's very much in line with my thoughts as well And I want to make sure that the projects and the end users And the contributors do talk as much as possible But I also want to make sure that everybody is getting what they want out of these sigs So it's not finalized yet and hopefully we'll work that out over the upcoming weeks Thank you A couple more bits of context that I think are important Joe there are some example, um manifestos That are written down I I can't remember quintin if you kept them in or moved them to an appendix or put them aside But um, it would be good to them in the dark Right excellent So we believe that when a sig is created, there should be quite a lot written down about what it's supposed to do In particular, what are the success criteria so we can track it? Okay, and there's quite a lot of details about that This question about authority and unbiasedness We need to make sure all that stuff is crystal clear. I think if we have any Uh, politics or debates or disputes around these sigs it will be around those issues Uh, the particular question of bias was the concern that One or two vendors might try and capture a sig and uh quintin and the others came up with a number of mechanisms For governance in the sigs hopefully to mitigate that risk Please please take a look. We must make sure these things operate as Value adding but also unbiased in that sense. Okay, that's really really important I have a question. Yeah Is there a uh, is there a um Uh, for lack of a better word code of conduct for uh, the sig members around um Operating in that way So I think there's an explicit statement that says all of the COC and other high-level principles from the cncf are applied to the sigs Um quintin was that extended in the edit? Yeah, there's a there's a fair amount of detail about how the sig operates and Uh, we we can probably flesh it out more detail, but I read the document I think it's fairly explicit and hopefully clear what the intention and mechanism is uh, and we can flesh that out over time Um, I'd be happy to work with you on that. I think my specific concern is that um, the people working on this shouldn't be using the Uh TOC as a platform to uh slam competitors would be the Word to position their own products Yeah, yeah, uh, definitely there there is wording to that effect and the the rising tide uh lifts all boats uh wording rate Do does that does that uh, does that statement apply to the toc as well? is that is that flowing down from the toc or is that uh Uh, something that we're working on just at the sig level at this point So there's a set of operating principles that the toc Um, kind of abide by abides by so I think that would That would apply in this case Uh, is that the does that would down just posted? Okay. Yeah. Yeah, which for the new toc Uh, I'll probably you'll have to do a bit of a refresher and get some comments. Um on that All right. Thank you Okay, at this point we're probably running out of time on this topic I'll just whiz through the steps that I think are next so we will stick this thing in a pr Allow a final sort of round of reviews. Uh, hopefully put it to the vote shortly Select a toc liaison per sig To get those things bootstrapped And then uh, perhaps start, you know, not trying to do all six in parallel at once but start with the most pressing ones Select chairs and get those moving forward. That's that's kind of the rough plan of action at this point And chris over to you. I think we we've used up a lot of your time for this No, that sounds good. Uh, I just wanted to you know, obviously we have a review and black uh backlog of kind of graduation Request but um, you know, I uh, you know, silly forgot To give some time for the new toc members to kind of introduce themselves You know, we had some comments from the outgoing folks But someone pinged me like you should have the new folks introduce themselves because not everyone knows everyone So I'm like, oh good point. So kind of wanted to leave the last uh 10 15 minutes for The new folks that were um elected to kind of say hi and um, you know, maybe what they want to kind of get out of their Experience here are goals. So um, let's let's do that Maybe we'll start with who wants to want to want to say hi first Yeah, I'll say hi Yeah I want to go off of it. Let's map. How about go? Oh, hey everyone. It's Matt Klein. Uh, I'm a software engineer at Lyft Uh, I uh, mostly these days work on envoy Uh, super excited to join the toc. Uh, I guess from uh, brian's thoughts of you know, picking things that I'd like to focus on I'm very interested in advocating for projects So you can expect me to be looking at graduation requirements Making sure the projects are are getting what they need to thrive And uh, you know, I'm also very interested in making sure that we are looking out for People who are actually using this this technology Uh, so yep. Thank you everyone. Very excited to be here Cool, let's go back alphabetical order. Maybe brendan burns I'm putting you button If if not, I will skip Yeah How about how about we skip brendan and go to joe? Uh, yes, I'm joe beat up Uh now at at vmware, but I think you know my goals on the on the toc Looking forward Is to focus on the community and the projects A couple of things I want to explore is you know, how can we make the toc more effective? How can we expand the reach? Uh, and I think things like the like the same proposal are critical there Um, sort of in line with what matt's saying, what can we do to support? projects, can we get creative about? Not Trying to to control the projects but provide more services and more options for them find ways to put the The the the money that the cncf has to work Towards that and then I also want to explore How do we not just boost cncf projects? But how do we look at boosting this segment sort of the idea of cloud native in general? Because I think that as we look at the set of technologies that folks use to solve problems You know, we're not in a world where every single technology is going to come from the cncf So I think we have to we have to think more inclusively about you know users beyond just the projects that are in the cncf cool Do we have brennan back? If not happy to go to over there Yeah, I hear I hear I hear something We'll go to kelsey since kelsey's here Yeah, I'm maybe on the back connection show if I drop Oh, no worries Good to hear you. All right So I guess I come from that kind of user community focus that probably cares more about the principles in the project So, you know all the people that are excited by seeing their careers boosted by things like the kubernetes certification The companies who leveraged these apis technologies or ideas I'm kind of focused on you know making sure that there's front and center And also trying to make more transparent. I guess the political parts of all of this I think a lot of people feel that this is all a mystery and it's pay for play I think that's a bad reputation for the cncf to have If you want to continue to kind of put that Community face forward. So those are kind of my primary goals in the short term as I learn more Cool. Thank you kelsey Is shengli from ali ali here? Do you believe so? Okay Hello, everyone. So i'm xiang from alibaba So i'm working on the uh clausman system for alibaba as well as the Continuous service for the cloud. So previously I worked at chorus on some open source projects including acd cooperatives, etc So i'm super glad to have the opportunity to work with awesome people at cncf and from the community so I hope to uh help with the adoption growth and the direction of Cloud native technologies. So as a toz member I hope to listen to more end users and really make the technology useful for the end users And also I think I hope to help it's more the sandbox products to help them to grow and to Eventually graduate because I think we didn't really pay enough attention to those sandbox products Personally, I get involved into a few sandbox products. I think They all really want to graduate, but they don't really know how to do it So I really want to help there. Um, thank you Thanks And then our end user representative, uh, jeff jeff bruer. Yeah, hi guys jeff bruer from uh into it we, uh, over the past few years have uh, been doing some pretty crazy adoption of of uh, kubernetes and you know, it's it's uh into it has a long history of of of customer obsession follow me homes that kind of thing and uh, and really designing systems around the around the user by, you know, observing their their behavior and And it's uh, it's something that I'd really like to bring To the to see is that is that customer focus that customer obsession with the customers, you know, really being the consumers of these technologies and so We dabble a little bit in the uh, in the open source As well. So I'd like to bring a few of the You know of the of the technical pieces in there But but it's mostly focused on on that end user and and the kinds of things that we can do just to just to make those developers a lot more successful Awesome. Let's go You know, if anybody needs uh, anybody in the u.s. Needs a discount on turbo tax, you know, I'm happy to help them out Good to know. Thanks for the offer Is is brennan is brennan here? If not, we'll give him a little time Next time Cool. Thanks. Uh, thanks everyone. Um, you know, we have about eight minutes Left we could talk a little bit about graduation backlog From my perspective, uh, next up fluent d is pretty much cleared to go. We're just waiting some on some kind of legal Stuff behind the scenes, um to get done before we call a vote for that I also believe brian grant is interested in bringing container d forward But I would kind of like open up the floor to any discussion amongst the toc on how they feel About the backlog, especially the Kind of existing to you has a little bit more knowledge and context of what's going on here Yeah, I just want to say a little bit about the graduation process and fluent d and container d specifically We have a set of graduation criteria, but they're pretty lightweight Um, but we do have some existing criteria. So what I recommend doing, uh, for anybody with questions is to look at the graduation proposals which has A bunch of information that specifically addresses the existing criteria Uh, even I suggest digging into the Uh, what the cii the core infrastructure initiative badge means that's one of the criterion. Um, so Uh, take a look at that. We also have the project health dashboard and generally the Uh, projects put together a presentation Uh, with an update about their progress Uh, so container d in particular has all those things. I believe the Presentation was in december We can dig up a link and maybe post it to the proposal if it's not there already But uh, you know, take a look at those Materials we have and then if there are Additional questions we can ask them People are perceiving the cncf graduation to be a high bar. I think that's a good thing We want it to be a high bar Um, People in the ecosystem users and others Still have concerns about whether the bar is high enough. So that's definitely something I'm interested in looking at as well um Because we do want a rich ecosystem of projects, uh, but we want people to be able to rely on those projects In all the context in which they want to use them Um, so graduation criteria are currently our best, uh Mechanism maybe are one of our only few mechanisms. We have to do that You know, I think uh, we have to be careful to you know I think we could update a lot of these requirements in parallel by and also kind of respect kind of the queue that that currently exists. Um At least my perspective there, um for the container d bits, uh, you know, i'm i'm you know, since there's uh, You know, it's generally the way we've been working is asking for a primary toc sponsor For any of these requests to call a formal vote Um, brian has volunteered both for fluent d and container d Uh fluent d. I will i'm happy to call about once the legal stuff happens behind the scenes and container d Maybe since we have a new toc, uh, maybe we leave it open for Maybe a week of commentary from the new toc and community and if there are no other kind of strong dissent I'm happy to kick off A formal vote on container d next week And the others, um, I you know, it's basically the other kind of graduation requests are looking for primary kind of toc sponsored to Uh push for uh for a vote Yeah, and if you are unfamiliar with the details of a project and you feel that the graduation Uh information that's been provided is not sufficient. Please do Speak up because I know for a number of the the past graduations um, they're pretty So they were pretty well known projects. So that was Uh less of an issue but as we get to some of these I imagine that uh, that may not be the case Any other comments from the toc or the community on this particular topic? We have a few minutes left All right, I will consider uh this meeting Uh adjourned, uh, I'll send out a note on uh the graduation kind of criteria and asked for kind of wider feedback On that we could get something refreshed over the next couple of months So look for that other than that, uh, we'll meet again on February 19th So thanks again to the new toc members. Uh, and also thank you again the outgoing Toc folks totally appreciate the work that you've done over the last A few years to get where cnc of is today. So thank you Thank you guys. Thanks right