This proposed edit makes sense to me.

 

From: cdf-toc@... <cdf-toc@...> On Behalf Of Michael Winser via Lists.Cd.Foundation
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 5:49 PM
To: cdf-toc@...

Subject: Re: [cdf-toc] [CDF Technical Oversight Committee] [VOTE] Working Groups and SIGs

 

+1 non binding 

 

I would suggest a future edit to change "Durations for a Working Groups should be <6 months" to "Durations for a Working Groups must be <6 months"

 

I think that once a working group has established itself and is showing ongoing traction then more timeline flexibility is reasonable but during the early days of both the foundation and the inevitable flurry of working group proposals I think that shorter initial timelines will be best.

 

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:49 PM Kohsuke Kawaguchi <kk@...> wrote:

+1 binding

 

On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 8:07 Tara Hernandez via Lists.Cd.Foundation <tarahernandez=google.com@...> wrote:

+1 binding

 

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 12:09 PM Dan Lorenc via Lists.Cd.Foundation <dlorenc=google.com@...> wrote:

The working group and SIG process proposal is ready for a vote. The full proposal can be found here:

https://github.com/cdfoundation/toc/pull/21

 

Remember that the TOC has binding votes only, but we do appreciate non-binding votes from the community as a sign of support!

 

Dan Lorenc

 

--

Tara Hernandez

Engineering Manager Google Cloud

 

 

--

Kohsuke Kawaguchi