2021-05-05 TAC Minutes

Attendees & Representation (default sort: member first name)

TAC Members and Project representatives should mark their attendance below 
Non-TAC project reps do not count towards meeting quorum

X = Present | P = Proxy  (Indicate in the table with @name for @name

LF Staff: @Kenny Paul, @Casey Cain,  @Heather Kirksey,  @Jim Baker

Agenda

• Start the Recording

• We will start by mentioning the project's Antitrust Policy, which you can find linked from the LF and project websites. The policy is important where multiple companies, including potential industry competitors, are participating in meetings. Please review and if you have any questions, please contact your company legal counsel. Members of the LF may contact Andrew Updegrove at the firm Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to the LF.

  • Antitrust Policy

• Roll Call

• Action Items Review

• Agenda Bashing

• General Topics

  • Developer & Testing Form

  • Future Developer Events

    • Possible return to in-person developer events!

    • Cadence (Previously had been 1 week in Jan in Europe, 1 week in Asia in June, co-located w/ ONE Summit)

    • Starting back – Jan 2022?

    • Input on size and which projects will want tracks

    • LF Survey on events: https://linuxfoundation.org/en/blog/what-we-learned-from-our-survey-about-returning-to-in-person-events/

    • Possible LFN focused survey?

  • Whitepaper @Ranny Haiby

  • TAC participation & structure

  • Committer Rep voting eligibility 

  • Wiki improvements

• Any Other Topics

Minutes

Developer & Testing Forum

• 2021 LFN Developer & Testing Forum June

• 4 day event - June 7th - 10th, 2021. 

• same time slots each day from Noon UTC to 16:30 UTC

• summary from 16:30 to 17:00 UTC

• Encouraging submitters to consider for an "on-demand" session with pre-recorded content

• Both live and "on-demand" sessions may be published on YouTube after the event (submitters may opt-out of YouTube publishing)

• Projects are encouraged to have a "theme" for their project's track; will consider an overarching theme for future events

Future Event feedback

• @Heather Kirksey What is the right timing and frequency for in-person events and virtual events? Any feedback around events?

• @djhunt 2 considerations - more attendees in virtual events is good, what would be the tradeoff?

  • Remote accessibility is really important on an on-going basis

  • Decision in June for in person venue

  • @Frank Brockners Hybrid event with strong virtual track - business travel is not coming back at prior levels

    • Change up the setup for conferencing - make the virtual/physical experience richer - mic per table for all

• Size- last event venue was targeted for ~250 people - virtual events gain over 500 viewers

• What other communities may be interested in participating besides the core 3 that have been ?

• @Heather Kirksey recommends an LFN specific event survey to gain insight to what we should do.

• @djhunt @Frank Brockners - poll the community about what they can support/want before suggesting a timeframe

• concerns raised over sending such a survey out while the pandemic is raging in certain geographies.

• @Ranny HaibyCorporate policy unclear for events in the future - too early to know

White papers status @Ranny Haiby

• believe the E2E slicing paper may be ready by the June event

• 5G Super Blueprint may become a series of smaller whitepapers than being one huge one

  • https://lf-networking.atlassian.net/wiki/x/lC7v

TAC participation & structure

• @djhunt talked about the structure of the TAC and any changes we would like to make to the participation.  Please be thinking of any ideas that we could do to improve the TAC participation and structure. 

Committer Rep voting & eligibility

• Going to need a vote on changing the criteria and what the criteria should be

• Perhaps a offline vote? @Al Morton

  • Quorum and attendance enforce voting eligibility

  • Offline votes require a majority of the full TAC membership to cast a vote

• Anuket has a process implemented via LFX Insights 

• Broader participation is required to include spec writers as well - contributors should be inclusive

• @Kenny Paul let communities select the voting population based upon the same criteria used for electing their TSCs

• @Casey CainPerhaps a GB seat for non-code writers? Idea needs development 

• @Robert Varga Cannot this system be gamed easily? Needs to be considered

• 3 options

  1. Status quo

  2. set a new global policy for all projects

  3. Community selected matching their TSC criteria

Action items