Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Attendees 

...

  1. Scot Steele(Microsoft)
  2. Trevor Bramwell
  3. Pankaj.Goyal (Microsoft)
  4. David McBride (LFN)
  5. Karine Sevilla(Orange)
  6. Sandra Jackson (Deactivated) (LFN)
  7. Ulrich Kleber(Huawei)

Agenda

TimeTopicPresentersNotes
5 min
Quorum met.  Agenda accepted as written.  Minutes from last week approved.


5 min

Announcements


5 min
  •  Inputs into October GB (Governance Board) meeting
    •  - Need to provide information about Anuket and other projects under the Anuket Umbrella. Due by   

Please get your inputs to the October GB meeting!!!  Use the slides that were sent out as a template.   Issues :  RC2 PTL is missing.  Overall contribution level in RC2 is down.  Hear from board that Anuket is important, but the contributing companies need to allocate resources to back up that commitment with specific skills such as resources that can do coding work, full stack developers, and some architects.  RC1 needs more more architects and people who can document the project.  Stress the importance of the project.  Anuket Assured needs support from the board member companies. 

  • Anuket Assured
  • RC1-2 understaffed
  • Overall need for more support for coding activities – need to quantify what those activities to validate their value – or not

The community has to validate the value of the Anuket project.  Hoping that the EUAG can fill the role of supporting and validating the requirements going forward.

Per Emma Foley There is a very clear link between RCs and Anuket Assured. Documentation needs to be in place so it's easy to see which test cases in RCs tells you that the box is ticked for each requirement in RAs.

5 min

Need 40 votes - only 23, why?

10 min

People are encouraged to nominate themselves.

The latest version of the charter has removed the requirement for one vote per company.  The wiki has been updated to reflect the correct version of the charter.  Discussion of the TSC composition.  Do we need to limit the membership to a single representative for any given company?

Beth Cohen suggest that we can raise the limit on representatives per company (2 max), but there should be an upper limit

TSC members agreed that Scot Steeleis fully eligible to vote in the election due to his contributions to the project (no objections).

Does the TSC agree to amend the charter, replacing the old language with this NEW Language:

Maximum of two members per company/organisation
o
If more than two (2) TSC members would be from the same group of Related
Companies, either at the time of election or from a later job change or changes
to company owner
ship, they will jointly decide on the two (2) individuals to be
the TSC members.

13 member companies TSC members agree to the change to the charter per the language above.

Vote to remove the 2/3 quorum requirement for elections.

13 TSC member companies agree to the change to the charter to remove the 2/3 quorum requirement (for voter turnout/ballots returned – see Election Validity Requirement Vote text in the Agenda portion of this page).

Supportive comments to retroactively apply the removal of the quorum requirement for replacing Mark Beierlwith Ulrich Kleber.    TSC members agreed to apply the Election Validity Requirement charter change with zero objections.

Ulrich Kleberis now a member of the TSC.  Congrats are in order.

15 min
Release Updates 

David McBrideupdated the release progress.  


5 min 
Discuss again tomorrow
10 min

Walter.kozlowski and sub-project Leaders


5 min
  •  GitLab update 
    •  EasyCLA support
No Updates.
5 min
  •  

    Status Updates

    •  LF IT/Infra update: (Trevor Bramwell)





No updates

5 min

Beth Cohen MEF- Edge proposal looking for supporting and contributing Co's - conbtact contact Beth  - Standard API's for edge - need 3 more Co's who are MEF membemembers.



0 min

AOB