Part of this meeting is done from a meeting room in Budapest
ONE Summit: India
ONE Summit - San Jose
Programming committee composition is still not clear
If anyone is interested to be part of the programming committee slack Pano and Heather
LFN Annual Report
From Pano: "... we’re into the annual report production cycle and we’re looking for “year-in-review” input from the projects. we’d like to hear about successes, challenges and how they forged forward toward new horizons. please ask them to aim for about 1/2 to 1 page of single spaced text (use default google docs formatting) for monday nov. 13."
A:Sandra Jackson to create a ticket to LF IT to create the needed release strings in the Jira workspaces.
A:Gergely Csatari to send an update to the community and explain if a non-specification project is not in the list by the TSC considers that they are not part of the Pieman release while for specification projects the TSC expects no new content in Pieman.
We need to update the charter. A:Gergely Csatari to make a proposal for the new charter.
Sandra will send out a mail with an updated election schedule what the TSC will vote on email.
The schedule proposes to have the SPC and TAC rep election. We need to get a confirmation form the current rep-s, that they are okay to do a bit over term serve (Ok for Gergely Csatari (TAC rep)) OK from SPC rep Beth Cohen
Separate repo and readthedocs or one repo and readthedocs
To guarantee that the docs are consistent the proposed process is that the TSC appoints “doc volunteers” who get committer rights to the sub-project repos. In case of a pr is stalling related to the look and feel of the repos with the approval of the TSC they can merge it without fulfilling the branch protection rules.
We should update the list showing the actual state of the repos
We should see what this scan is scanning before we order
Security scan is part of the offered services for TAC projects
Walter as the board representative
My plan is to create a cross LFN wiki site to collect information, suggestions, feedback from the projects, as well as to convey the Board related and appropriate information to the project committers.
My suggestion would be to have a regular (say once in a quarter or at least 6 months) an open Board meeting (like we did for AI).
I think, we will need to raise a proposal for the Board to assist in seeking more resources and other (what?) support for the LFN activities.
In my view, Board could influence LFN bodies to help in better marketing the projects and the committers’ efforts. Any good ideas how?
Perhaps IT support issues if we think that they should be improved.