[CDF Technical Oversight Committee] [VOTE] Working Groups and SIGs
|
+1 binding
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 12:09 PM Dan Lorenc via Lists.Cd.Foundation <dlorenc=google.com@...> wrote:
--
Tara Hernandez Engineering Manager Google Cloud
|
|
|
|
Kohsuke Kawaguchi
+1 binding
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 8:07 Tara Hernandez via Lists.Cd.Foundation <tarahernandez=google.com@...> wrote:
--
Kohsuke Kawaguchi
|
|
|
|
Michael Winser
+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:
|
|
|
|
Kay Williams <kayw@...>
This proposed edit makes sense to me.
From: cdf-toc@... <cdf-toc@...>
On Behalf Of Michael Winser via Lists.Cd.Foundation
+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:
|
|
|
|
Yoav Landman
+1 binding
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 at 3:53 Kay Williams via Lists.Cd.Foundation <kayw=microsoft.com@...> wrote:
--
|
|
|
|
Dan Lorenc <dlorenc@...>
And I'm obviously also a +1 binding on this, given that I wrote it :) That leaves us with 6 votes in favor, so this should be good to go! Thanks everyone. Dan Lorenc
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 11:32 PM Yoav Landman via Lists.Cd.Foundation <yoavl=jfrog.com@...> wrote:
|
|
|