Cab1: audio transcript

[Transcript Start] 00:00:00

So good morning or good evening everyone. Welcome to the first open forum of the Cloud Foundry community advisory board. I’m Chris Harris from IBM. I thought this together and I thought what we could do is [inaudible 0:00:21] yes we can through half the members of the CAB each introduce themselves to the community. Talk a little bit about the CABS’ mission and why we’re what we wish to accomplish. Then I think James Barry is gonna present the incubator program.

Yeah.

And I will talk a little about, talk a little bit about the Cloud Foundry community website the cloudfoundry.org and how we can manage the content go forth. And then I think we can open it up to a more of an open forum discussion and have a bit of a dialogue amongst ourselves. Try to keep it orderly about things that we can improve and the ability of the members of this community to contribute and to improve the overall. Possibly [inaudible 0:01:38.7]. As well as to entertain thoughts about how we can improve Cloud Foundry itself both from a user perspective or yeah from a user perspective whatever. The chapter that I chose, I chose. Dr. Nic on the call actually wrote it but basically it provided a little handy tool for people to raise their hand in any case they like to speak so make wave. What we can do here is when we get into the open dialogue and someone had a question. Click the little avatar at the bottom of the clapper on there and that will raise your hand. And then I can speak with you. With that, again so I’m after up the introduction thing, I’m Chris Harris from IBM. [inaudible 0:02:36] and I have overall technical responsibility for all of the open source and open standard initiatives that IBM engages in relative to cloud. And that means that I have the responsibility for our engagements in Openstack and in Cloud Foundry amongst a number of other initiatives that we drive. Who would like to go next? James you wanna go?

Yeah. I am James Watters. I’m responsible for the Cloud Foundry product group at Pivotal. Where we make a product called Pivotal CF and I’ve been involved with the project for about three years and I worked together with Chris to originate and kick off the community advisory board that we’re starting here today and I look forward to seeing what we can take us together.

Other folks to give introductions do you hear me?

Ah yes. How about Colin.

We lost you there at the end Chris.

Sorry, maybe Colin can you introduce yourself?

Yes. [inaudible 0:04:26] And we are a London based consultancy delivering Cloud Foundry in similar cloud for years. I believe at the introduction Cloud Foundry about two years ago. And also we [inaudible 0:04:47] Cloud Foundry. [inaudible 0:04:52] and also some Pivotal labs people working on both things on Cloud Foundry.

Thanks Colin, Cathy please introduce yourself.

Sure thanks, hi everyone I’m Cathy Spence and I work for Intel. I worked for Intel for 17 years, last 10 of them at Intel IT. I’ve located in Portland, Oregon and I’m the technical domain owner for PaaS. We’ve been using Cloud Foundry for quite sometime. I’d say more than two years now and our interest is from the enterprise standpoint. So in terms of extending our enterprise private cloud with platform as a service. We’re big believers in the open source approach. So I’m pleased to be part of the CAB and thanks everyone for joining us today.

Thanks Catherine, Dr. Nic.

Hi, I’m on the front. Do that work? Do this technology work?

Yes.

Fantastic. I’m Dr. Nic, I have a CEO stack online. I recently been engineering and technology engineer and so we now have a small but very rapidly growing consultancy for helping people running their Cloud Foundry as an open source and because they’re all the same. And yeah, a big believer this should be one path this should be one.

Awesome. Thanks. What do we have, Jeff.

Hi, good morning. I’m Jeff Hobbs from at the States, CTO here at the states. Being involve with Cloud Foundry from early days when we joined this on community lead. With a lot of development built a product called Stackato that is based on Cloud Foundry and some of the piece have been open source already. And wanna talk about contributing more and interested to see Cloud Foundry move forward.

Great. Thank you very much and Jonathan join us.

Ok. I guess not.

All right. Adrian maybe you should introduce yourself as well. You’re my fellow partner in crime, in a lot of it.

Ah yes, thank you Chris. I’m Adrian Colyer. I also work at Pivotal and take a little roll on behalf of the Cloud Foundry team of coordinating to the interaction with the advisory board and also in general with [inaudible 0:07:40].

Thank you. So I just realized probably shouldn’t have recorded it. I figured it out.

Thank you.

[inaudible 0:08:08] star two or star six seven or something like that. But one of those will mute everybody. You gotta choose wisely.

There is a bit of background noise. Let me just take a little look here. Hold on.

[All participants are now in listen only mode.]

Ok so whoever needs to speak just press star six. I muted myself, I muted everybody so that background noise is gone and I hopefully will increase the quality of the code and does anybody have any objections if I record this call. Just type into the chatroom if you do.

[This conference is being recorded only the main conference is recorded.]

Ok. There we go. So it’s now in record mode and I’ll send a link to the recording if anybody would like for customary. I called done before its two in the morning. Josh is on, awesome. Josh you wanna press star six and introduce yourself?

Good morning everyone. Sorry for that a little bit of delay, I’m running around a couple of kids at the moment. So my name is Joshua McKenty, I’m the co-founder of 15 cloud computing. I wrote a team at NASA few years back that started a small open source cloud computing project that turned into something called Openstack. And I sell commercial distribution of Openstack. My team is responsible for writing the BOSH CPI that allows Cloud Foundry to run on it. So we basically worked on that intersection. [inaudible 0:10:38] board and I’m really excited to do something better extraordinaire and something differently and just in general bring lessons learned from all because of customers together.

Awesome, thank you.

Sure, can I star six again.

You press star six again if you like or you can stay out mute. I just wanted to make sure whatever the background noise is removed. So in my chatroom again. Here we go. So I teamed up a draft agenda. So the first point after the introduction there. Of course we didn’t get Jonathan. But he just joined us, haven’t introduced himself from status. He is the last member of the chat. Adrian would you mind served, put the link to the blog post that you and I wrote with permission of the CAB. Maybe we could brief this a little bit for you and summarize the sort of the main mission statement that you wrote of the CAB.

Sure yeah. Thank you Chris. Hopefully you can all hear me. Here the code of the advisory board. There really are several obviously, fundamentally about ensuring the health, vitality and the direction of Cloud Foundry project such as the serve even want very very wide range of stakeholders. So for me that would include the number of things very importantly thefirst feedback on the Cloud Foundry roadmap. So that anywhere we go, one of the important things we should be doing. How should we be building features here? Dscussions such as the one James posted around document section. All of those kinds of topics. First of all, where the project actually go. Function direction. And closely tied to that in my mind would be sort of I describe as hopefully help us at Cloud Foundry as an open development project. So the day to day operation of the project itself. Things like the process around. Full requests and sort of how we choose can be tracked, maybe how CI works. Mechanisms when tracked with the community and that whole sort of means helping people to be engaged to understand what’s going on and to contribute. All those topics are in the scope. Also one of the things that will be talked about later on today. Just all of the information that is available for what is on the website and that how would be taken forward. What we want to see there. What would help everybody. the platform conference, many of you were at the first one. Surprising , about six weeks ago, September we ran that. Obviously that wasn’t the only one, we want to do that again. So hoping to guess the right agenda, the right topics to be discussed, about conference, the right format should be. And then sort of finally anything around sort of chops of exceptions that might grow up in Cloud Foundry. The projects go to their definition. Things like the Incubator or process that we gonna discuss later on today. That would become the broad spectrum of responsibilities. You think about it, keeping the project healthy. Going in the right direction and keeping the community sort of engage. Anything that fits on those high level goals is fair game from my perspective.

Absolutely, thanks Adrian. Does anybody have any questions, mention it on the chat you can raise your hand if you do have a question. I thought that was pretty clear. And one of the interesting things we talked about at the conference and when ntroducing the notion of the CAB. Discussing how operating so forth. I think you know the intention that at that time we try add as much transparency as possible. We’re not trying to, you know, do things the Dark knight and some smoke room. But rather, you know, to conduct open forums like this and have open dialogues and open discussions around how we can improve things and how we can go to community. How we can improve the ability for the community to collaborate with each other. And be with then the truth and sort of nature of an advisory board. We would then advise, you know, exactly how what types of changes we thought should we make. And do our best to try and help make those real. Back to the agenda. So, that’s the CAB’s mission. Again anybody have any questions at all? No? Ok. James, James there, would you care to talk a little bit about the incubator program that we’re gonna be taking off?

Ok. I’m now unmuted off I believe. I’ll be happy to go over that Chris. So I put a link in the chat room. But if, for those of you don’t know in the chatroom. There’s a bit.ly associated with it. So bit.ly/cfincubator would get you to the Google doc that is now public and open for comments. Basically, the incubator program is a way for projects to go through a maturity phase for where there may be started initially in some other github repository or private location of some kind and then someone wants to nominate a project to be included into the Cloud Foundry. Eventually in to the Cloud Foundry top level github organization this is a program to facilitate that process. Involved, I think the easiest way to look at it, there’s a state transition diagram in the document that talks about how originally these projects can be started externally or in there’s also a Cloud Foundry github repository that Dr. Nic and others have been using and it has a very open model for collaboration. So very, very low friction. All you gotta do is email Dr. Nic and ask him for access to that repository and you get very liberal commit accesses to that repository. It’s very soft covered and then as you go up the line, we’re now introducing a new github organization called CloudFoundry - Incubator. Where this is a place where someone would submit a nomination for a project B cap level. Saying “Hey I want this project to be considered for eventual top level consideration”. We want those projects to have some amount of working code and some backers so that we can say that there appears to be a viable approach. And then in that process. Once there’s a process by which there’s a decision made whether to bring that project in the incubator and during that time there’s a process. The project can mature and conform with all the expectations that are required of a top level project and then there’s another determination made if the project is ready to graduate into the top level. And when those projects pass that threshold they’re moved into the top level project. And there’s also offerings for both of these. If at some time the project would be better to continue externally outside of the official process then they will go back to whatever repository that they had come from or they can be retired and go to the Cloud Foundry attic. In the same goes for projects that are currently in the Cloud Foundry top level organization. They can be retired from top level project something that the project stands behind some support and moved into the attic which is basically a retirement place where the code or theorem for long term for people can see it there. But the project does not officially doesn’t stand behind them any longer. So that’s a high level overview of the program. We initially put this together and some other projects in play that wanted to go through this process. And the first one being IBM admin UI that was shown at the platform CF conference in September. And there’s a couple of versions of that, there’s a version one that was v1 Cloud Foundry and I believe that is now in the Cloud Foundry – Community organization and given that the project is kinda retired the v1 project. We’re probably gonna leave that one there. The v2 version of the IBM admin UI is compatible with cross under v2 and so we’ve made that a project in the Cloud Foundry – Incubator organization. It’s the first one there. You can go and see that today at github/cloudfoundry-incubator and you can see that the IBM admin UI is now a public repository that is available. First one in that organization and it will, it’s compatible with v2 so go ahead up there and try it. And then there are two more projects that are under consideration right now. Share My Cloud Foundry which is, wait sir there’s a question? Ok. There are two more projects under consideration for the Incubator that we haven’t moved in there quite yet ‘coz we didn’t get a chance to finish in putting this together relatively quickly. One is Share My Cloud Foundry it’s currently in the Cloud Foundry – Community repository and that is one from that Dr. Nic and others had used to make it easy to add users and have users do self-registration on an open source Cloud Foundry environment. So if you stand up the Cloud Foundry instead from an open source and you wanna have a people come to a one page and register for that and that’s what Share My Cloud Foundry does. And another project called Spit. Spit was developed by Al Turaci of, he’s currently on the core Cloud Foundry team working on run time. But he’s developed it in his all powers and night weekend time. And this is a project that helps with a BOSH template and so that is another one that we’re starting to use now and some to produce some of our BOSH releases but given it was developed outside of the project time by Alex we would nominate that for an incubator style approach. Anyway that’s a high level overview of the incubator process. There’s a doc there that’s open for comment. We’re happy to get comments on the process and get feedback on that. And I guess now Chris if you wanna facilitate questions if there’s any on the chat. I’m happy to answer them.

Thanks James. I don’t seeing questions but again if anybody does have a question about the process about the incubator program, just feel free to raise your hand and use star six on you. I’ll call you if there’s more than one. I’m finding it hard to believe that there aren’t any questions or comments. This is actually some pretty significant stuff and I’m pretty to see it. I think maybe one thing to, you know, the TF for discussion is this just for the community or does this include project coming from Pivotal.

Yeah, this is James Watters. Can you hear me Chris?

Yeah. If I’m sharing a mic with James here at the office.

I think this is gonna be a blend. I think we’ve held a line enough of things into the incubator process is we were doing a rewrite. Eitherf or language or code quality reasons. I thought it is already an accepted part of an accepted use component. So we did a rewrite of the health manager which treat vital based on our users at Cloud Foundry high scale. We needed to better test it. We need a more reliable health manager, we’re running into issues there and we wanted to move very quickly and get that rewrite done. So that’s it for incubation. And the same thing with the Ghost CLI we’re having a lot of problems with people getting started having set a groovy environment. And so we moved very quickly to start rewriting that and to deliver that in to the community. I do think that for new projects like this or if there’s very different functionality or introducing something completely new or different to the project. We would wanna go into incubation. We just need to reserve the right to move quickly on quality updates of the core components because we’re running in production currently now.

Thanks James. Dr. Nic. Yourself star six.

Hello? Is there anybody there?

Dr. Nic go ahead.

Dr. Nic hit star six.

Dr. Nic star six.

Yes! That’s successful. I’m so old technology. As example take one of the projects that fuelled his work on cross Cloud Foundry. As an example so if I wish to have that put in to the Incubator. Does it become one of the main Cloud Foundry projects? True to this I would now turn around and gonna be kept this and say it. And then the community project would receive any feedback on that and make a decision. Is there any magic to this process?

Yes, this is James, can you guys hear me? So I’ll start from it again.

Yeah, we can hear you.

Yeah.

Ok, so the processes may actually go from doctoring so cover decision making process.

So it’s like a one paragraph on proposing a project that I’m looking at.

Yeah. Yeah, that’s the way the process goes from the proposal, you have that right. You send an email to b cap and again this is just the role out feedback about making out adjustments, we certainly can do that. I think I’m told that I’ve been away from b cap for the last few days that IBM had proposed some things about availability and things like that. That I haven’t got the chance to review yet so maybe there’s a better way than posting on the mailing list. I think the mailing list to start with is a pretty good place. And then there’s a section in the doc called the decision making process. Have you seen that Nic?

Decision making. Looking, looking, looking. Ah, no.

Just right at the diagram.

Underneath the diagram. I found the diagram.

There it is. Alright. Ok.

Every point where there is a transition, there involves a deicision making process. The community invites the board will have input into that and make a, give advice. But the final decision does involve two differenc reviews. From the Cloud Foundry product team and the Cloud Foundry engineering team. One is the strategy review and one is the technical review. And we have links in the back we give a little bit more detail on what each of those are. A little bit further below. But that’s basically the process. Yes, you submit a mailing list request. To mailing list. The CAB has the option to recommend or not recommend or say nothing on the process. We haven’t really determined how often the CAB’s gonna meet. So if something’s wanna go quickly I don’t know wanna go for a month or if you wanna do things electronically. That’s up for discussion. And then there’s also reviews that we will go through the strategy and technical review have criteria spelled out below. And some of that, specifically like code standards and around continuous integration and some requirements are needed for us to have confidence that when we accept the project in that we know that we can stand behind it. In terms of for example, if someone wants to make a code change in one component that breaks another component we want continuous integration in place. Such that the, all the dependencies can be not only known but also when they break. And so that would be one of the examples of the standard that we wanna hold on all the projects do.

Bringing the project for example into continuous integration would you wanna be running like first for me this project is intended for one that paths on tryna would, is there help available to get it running on your I say on Pivotal Jenkins or would you rather running it on CI somewhere or.

Yeah

Projects and see you know and…

I can in type it on that for a moment. This is Joshua. We are hosting a CI environment for Cloud Foundry on Openstack testing. Definitely something we’re working to make to make it available to the community. I don’t know exactly what we’re gonna do for that yet but I think it will be fairly tied in to this incubator process. More of just a credential management question and those where and how hand out the perfect credentials and jobs into Jenkins. I think there are some lessons learned from from other as far as how Stackforge does it but definitely that’s not the question.

I’m gonna figure the rest of that with ourselves.

Dr. Nic your point is also valid about to date we haven’t had the travis is public, the travis CI build have been but the Jenkins have not been and we definitely wanna position so do we get even the stuff that has been on Jenkins on prividy ws areas for us into public view. So that’s part of our transition into having more public CI.

And I think that would be a great topic the next time we do wanna biz is to give an update on a planned public CI. There’s also a question in the chatbox around. Who’s responsible for maintaining the code during incubation? And I think that’s a really important question. So just everyone’s clear. IBM and whosever involved in the incubation has the full rights to take full requests on that code that’s in incubation. And we would expect whoever originate the incubation can continue to lead and to maintain that code. So IBM has literally full control over that’s going on in there. And Chris I don’t know if you wanna speak about your plans and how would you take community input on the code while it is on incubation.

Yeah, well thanks, that’s a good transition. From IBM perspective we intend to change the intent and fully define and continue explore involve at the true incubation and hopefully into the core Cloud Foundry. And you know, this is essentially something that we use internal on our own blue compartment. And that we intend to maintain directly from the community. So if I mention were service were full behind it and I think that you’re actually right if you’re proposing something. You know that, not only from a strategic perspective, I think there’s also some sort of commitment being made by the party who is proposing for incubated projects be circulated into the core that they’re certainly behind that and taking full responsibility to continue to maintain it and accept so forth, for the life of that into the attic. In terms of the approach that were taking into accepting full requests, we accept full request from anybody and in fact we’re also as we were doing with the IBM build pack we’re even requiring full request on some IBMers. And then through the process that in on the course and the end are the two end will be served. Initially responsible for reviewing the full requests and the [inaudible 0:35:28].

So Jeff you have a question?

I think I want you to know. So I’m kinda concerned about the very quality un-openness of the decision making process as I see Adrian partially answered that there is a potential future where the CF Engineering team is not just Pivotal but what is it about. I’m switching between my chat and document here, if you were to propose something that Pivotal may strategically not be interested in but the majority of the community is that kind of like a walking point. And then you know there is, to be honest I like to raise at some point my questions at some of the existing designs to consider for review and it’s a little bit worrying from Pivotal point-of-view to say well we got stuff in production that using that stuff so that won’t change not whether it’s a good idea or was well-designed on or not. But based on their enemies there are lots of people trying to create production systems and so I’m just concerned about the, it’s not really a direction towards real open source project.

This is Josh and I’m happy. I’ve been sort of an outsider to that discussion in a sense that our systems doesn’t have any official status with Pivotal or anyone else around Cloud Foundry. But, I would say, from working relationship standpoint we did have problems that you referring to people. Originally at NASA were we wanted an app support for instance and that was commercial maps and they didn’t give any open source code and we couldn’t totally cross merg. And that was a more “open source” in a traditional sense of being on launch pad and endorsed by economical. And then this community is, but it was much less effective as far as community pressure. And I say every open source community is healthy only because the effectiveness of the community pressure. And I see Cloud Foundry is the place where, to me, pressure has been extremely effective. And I propose changes about architecture or major design points affecting production systems versus being the “right away forward”. We deal with that in Openstack constantly regardless of whether commercial, whether there is one commercial interest involved or hundreds of commercial interests involved there is always a pressure between production deployed systems and the direction that otherwise might to go. And that something that has to be balanced. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say hey guys there are a lot of people using that’s the way it is. So we can’t really just tear it out even though we like to. If you try to walk pass a construction site that’s probably my piece.

Yeah and that’s a good point because for the others listening obviously the parallel is to the point that was the start of hope in fact.

Yeah I think that’s right Jeff.

Yeah.

So one point to note there has been a discussion in the chat with around the CLA so the intention for the Incubator is that projects that are accepted into the Incubator are covered under the Cloud Foundry contribution license agreement. So it’s not necessarily each proposal is given a new project to a new CLA and so forth it’s kind of little bit simpler to manage. Dan you have a question?

I was just wondering if that feel like checker but running for those projects or every single project in there we have to check the CLA list themselves.

So we can make sure that the checker but will work against the Incubator projects as well. It’s a pretty basic configuration. We are, we’re probably. Maybe Adrian can speak about some of these, the Spring theme from has recently undergone some similar checker but thing that when someone submits spring projects that it checks against them, we might be unifying our tool chain with them because theirs is more full-featured and has some better capabilities but in either case we’ll make sure that the but that we use is a, covers the Cloud Foundry Incubator projects as well.

Thank you.

Ok any other questions about the Incubator.

Ok. The transition in discussion was the website. So some of you may have noticed. It’s slow to respond. That we recently re-launched the cloudfoundry.org. domain and we migrated some of the content that was for this from cloudfoundry.com and we added some additional metric at the bottom, preserve the live links about some of the discussions on the various mailing lists. And you know what some of the most recent and so forth. And we got some activity tracking that was pulling to sort of give us edge for how the community is growing. Anyone has noticed hasn’t been upgraded in a while and I don’t know what’s going on out there. But the intention here would be that the community essentially maintains the content on the community side. So we’re looking to establish the cloudfoundry.org as a repo underneath the Cloud Foundry project and we’ll accept full requests from the community if somebody like to either to make a change or propose some of additional content will go through review. The advisory board should have a look at what other being proposed in a speaking environment if it teams and we’ll transition that into a possible live site. We’re still in the process of getting all of that machinery in place that I’m hoping we’ll have that very soon now. I haven’t actually but I’m meaning to get an update from some of the guys that are working on this. To see how close they are to be in a position where we can open it up and accept full requests and so forth. But that’s certainly the intention. Again, we as a community I think jointly should own and maintain the content. If somebody has suggestion use it as they can. Issue a full request and we can have a discussion on the recap on mailing lists about about dot org feel free to email a member of the CAB and make some suggestions on the tempo look to take care of that. A couple of things the same link we had in the past where we can take us to the Cloud Foundry community wiki. I can’t remember James, do we rename this or do we leave it as Cloud Foundry wiki? In any event, I think the intention here is that we all own the content and we should help drive the community shore on contributions. Any questions there? Sounds good, ok. So that’s it for the community website. So, why don’t we transition now to a half an hour I guess. Sorry, not half an hour, what do we have left? We have a, yeah 20 minutes left. About half an hour of discussion on, if people have on how we can improve things within the community. How we can manage things better. If it’s a question of poly child, 50 different places that I can register an issue, how do I live of all these issues. How do I know I can take something that I can go back and do some development on. Full requests, who am I looking for some improvements to the documentation to make it easier for people to pick it up and start using it. Opening it up to any discussions at all so people just raise your hand and I’ll call you and star six yourself if you haven’t done that. Perfect. Oh, so we have a question about the mailing list for this kind of discussion as opposed to BOSH check. That’s actually, I think that’s a good question. I don’t know what others think. We were discussing this conference I think the content in there has been be kept, that’s where all of the it happened anyway. I agree, It tends to be original the list and maybe put in discussion. We should have something maybe a little less traffic. That I welcome people’s thoughts.

Yeah, it wasn’t clear if that was just really meant for like general community advisory board discussions and other inputs on the Incubator stuff, like the Incubator stuff maybe you want hear a question. Yeah there’s a general community. In general, first off lovely if we can rename the b cap CF depth but that’s some kind of a side issue. We did talk last time really about separating it in fact it was best to have it on the b cap in the most general corded mailing list until the noise is greater than until you see a real need to separate the list.

I agree.

So let’s try out the, voting thing if working on this thing as I can’t see it.

I don’t see voting.

I don’t see a voting.

Oh yeah, here it is, so. Keep discussion. And here we go. So you can vote.

I’m mobile only right now on the phone, but I cast the vote towards a separate mailing list. Towards the community advisory board discussions.

Who’s that.

Robby, Cleveland.

Sorry, we get clarification that maybe a slight confusion here. Is this just for community advisory board discussions and or incubator projects related discussions as well which can tend to be more obviously technical.

I can vote for you but I think I can’t cast your name. Chris can you cast a person’s name, I’m sorry.

I couldn’t, no. I’m sorry.

But that was Wayne Sigman

Ok, got it. Thank you.

I think to see mostly people saying yes let’s keep it on the get go for now. I think, you know, just comment if it starts feeling too noisy. And you start hearing rumblings from the developers the oh my God we’re talking about that is not related then or quite speaking of the opposite development conversations start crowding out others. We can figure that decision. But I think everything is mostly people is coming yes. Any minute.

I think friends tonight a secondary question which is should be checked be renamed to something that you know Cloud Foundry in the name.

This is James Barry, I certainly would like to do that too. There is, there’s a couple of things that we have to consider if we do that. One of which is, I don’t there’s an easy way with Google groups search to change url without losing the history. I certainly investigate that, but that was something we were concerned about in the past. But maybe that would be ok as long as we have a link to archives or something like that. Yeah, but we’re in the process of removing the cap whenever we come across it when possible. There are some places where disruptive thing to do. So if for example at private api stuff, it’s a private api and it’s Harvard or several places and we do not quite sure. We might leave that for a while. Eventually I would expect a b cap references as time approaches infinity to all be gone. But the time that which we had set a very aggressive time to do that. But for the mailing list we certainly try to do that sooner than later.

So can we sort of made that an action links ‘coz chase that down.

I tend to agree, I think the more that we can sort of rebrand from a commercial brand Cloud Foundry the better off we all are.

Yeah, let’s go ahead and do that. I don’t think anyone is holding on to b cap. Maybe we should give someone a chance.

I wanted to change for a long time. I just wanted to do it in a way that suddenly we lose half of the people talking on it. We don’t have any attachments on the name at all. In fact we just like it.

All right well then let’s. I’ll get with James Barry and figure that how to make that change. And we’ll definitely I think it would be valuable to do some sort of a clean transition for people won’t even notice we’re moving. And maybe even periodic don’t forget we’re here now. I don’t think we can actually rename the list right.

Some of before told me that. It was a little bit problematic with restoring things but I will certainly do the research.

Thanks. Do you have a final question or have you asked some before?

I think it’s just clarifying. That [inaudible 0:53:35] question.

Ok. Any other thoughts?

This is Michael can you hear me?

I can, you supposed you raised your handle.

Yeah. I raised my hand.

Go ahead Michael.

I wanted to pick up one title. From a product which is when do we start using cloudfoundry.org more intently as our source of information in terms of documentations of what? It’s a moment primarily the entropies that links to other pages and on cloudfoundry.com. Any thoughts from the community on that?

Oh yeah, in terms on the documentation it’s a yeah, that I think were on the process of transition as well. James if you wanna talk some of the things what happened on cloudfoundry.com.

Yeah, can you hear me Chris? Yeah, as part of transitioning Cloud Foundry to really no longer at all a product brand. Originally cloudfoundry.com was the hosted service brand and it had hundreds of thousands of users that come there to use the hosted service. So what’s gonna be happening is that’s going to redirect to a Pivotal web services website in the future after we get a GA launch of our enterprise product out. In December we’ll gonna reformat that the cloudfoundry.org will be the only Cloud Foundry url style website that we have. And we’d like all the docs and etcetera transition there. And I have Elisabeth Hendrickson here who is our director of engineering that’s working on docs right now. I don’t know Elisabeth if you wanna talk about what you want to do from our site. But I think we wanna turn it into a kinda open community driven full request box on dot org ASAP.

Sure. The currently four requests they hosted it, I’m sorry they are stored on github.cf/box as a currently gist that includes post commercial and open source information. So we’re in a time of transition in choosing a part that areas of documentation or topic. And I would love to see just the open source doc posted on the cloudfoundry.org domain. And with clear variation so that it’s much easier for the community how to do it against the doc. Coz’ the topics that are in the doc repo Cloud Foundry organization on github would just be open source related topics not a bunch of a specific dialog.

I can definitely agree with that such I certainly share just to get a Cloud Foundry specific docs separated. Somebody who intend to use it would like to be able the community documentation and give it around and others would like to do as well.

Any other thoughts on the documentation? If not then people feel free to raise your hand and you can ask a question or. It’s an open night if you will.

Can we learn more about the current measures to protect Cloud Foundry from abuse? Probably copied and probably use the name for their own benefits. Should there be a guideline on how the term Cloud Foundry can be used in marketing. You know, we talked about that in the past and that’s actually Adrian. And this is a good pon. Back when IBM and Pivotal announced that IBM was joining we, Pivotal made a declaration that the Cloud Foundry name should be used exclusively for non-commercial purposes. Do we have specific lines for it? That we can leverage to sort of help enforce that thing, Adrian?

I have a draft from our legal team that I just think we haven’t published it yet but that’s a good thing to maybe socialize the next time we have a CAB some of that language. We move forward with that and it doesn’t appear in any of our commercial brands etc. We’re transitioning the .org site. So that’s absolutely what we want and we did have one case where we filed a legal brief against a company con who drew a Cloud Foundry summit even though there was no real Cloud Foundry involvement in that. They did that for commercial gain, they were trying to brand themselves Cloud Foundry and we wrote them a letter and they took it down and we tell us that and we do defend the brand against abuse right now.

And this is. What I think right now, if I the natural model I think if you see a patchy model for how they protect their project names. For example, you can’t use Tomcat in a commercial product and you can say something [inaudible 0:59:57] but you can actually sort of take that project name directly in a commercial offering. So Little Cloud Foundry, IBM Cloud Foundry, I can say Cloud Foundry whether actually be under those kind of terms probably you don’t wanna see. Four Cloud Foundry’s would be ok. But generally that’s how I think about it. For following those patchy style guidelines.

James do we have some kind of an APA for a, when you think you might have that guidelines. Would there be plans to review that with the CAB?

Yeah, I think we should review that with the CAB. I think we can have that in the next few weeks. I know we already have a draft. I think we just need to publish it. The political we need to find an outlet and publish it.

Does anyone else comment more specifically on the flag next platform conference?

Yeah, on that. So the thinking that we would have one every six months and I think we’re still, I think certainly I know from an IBM perspective we’re still should have another one I think. The first one was very successful. We weigh more so I think James and I [inaudible 1:01:30]. And I think it was very effective in helping to generate both interest in Cloud Foundry but also to give people a little bit of a shot in the arm. And encourage them about proceeding forward with Cloud Foundry. I think one thing that at least from my perspective that we didn’t have enough thought with the tactical discussion. We had a great conference for the half of the second day which I think have discussions. And typically we need more of that. And so I hope that the next one we could have at least three days of the two and may be even four if we can pull it off. To enable us to have those deeper discussions around some of the areas that I think we’re getting a lot of discussion at the conference like what is core and should there be instead of a set of defined interfaces and extension cons that preserve across group of, not a call of releases twice a week. That we try to preserve for extended periods of time to enable others in the community to innovate in and around Cloud Foundry. To deliver value added in their perspective on the core platform itself. And how do we maintain those? How do we document them? How do we enforce them? Should we do something like performance setting against DPI and so forth. I think discussions like that, discussions that help manager. There were some really intense and healthy discussions around that and different ideas around how to deal with multi-site. All these conversations got going but then there really, at least from my perspective, there’s a need for more. Definitely we teem on having another conference at least three days in the spring of next year. The question is finding a medium and so forth. Dr. Nic?

As we finished talking it’s like you just stopped. The question I’m asking is I just want a clarification. You might not know yet. I don’t try to be pushy and I know we talked about it a little outside all of this year. Is there any idea we can help of once we stop bringing this project in. How do these projects have to product managers, do the projects have need to have product managers come with them? Do the work have to, not just, code standards, by the way. And do they have to be cared on. There can be all sorts of other rules which some of you may argue with this comfortable with Pivotal because where it come from. How other people develop it. Is there, is that being imposed. Constraints. I’m sorry.

I think that, if I can restate the question Dr. Nic it was, that every project come with a new PM how would, who saw it and so forth is that it?

Yeah. I’ll try to quite answer the question myself ‘coz [inaudible 1:05:23] in that document. I mean it’s not all project. The CF services contract project is managed really by Pivotal. All the other parts are. I’m just wondering if there’s a, that one of the rules, that is should have a project manager. But non-technical person but should there be a point person for every realized project? That is guiding its direction. It probably is from decision, the core project, if IBM or Stack online anyone else wants us to say we are full committed on the main project. [inaudible 1:06:07] San Francisco, for that function to be possible.

Just wanna change or tackle anything.

Yeah, I think, can you get James Watters.

Yeah.

Yeah, I think that one thing that should be standard is this. We definitely do want a certain level of code quality and test coverage in anything in the project. But in the case of the admin UI that’s really led kinda through IBM initiative and as long as you need code quality I think people can take different approaches to getting there. I think there are some parts of the project that are that we currently use project development in San Francisco. If add people to it and more probably continue to think our contributions in that way. But that is not indicative how all code should we contribute to the project should be created at all. So, an idea..

That’s right.

We should get an update on Jojo. IBM had two people to Jojo there are people here from Swisscom right now. Spencer has a person here. It’s a kind of a very interesting approach, I think that has done very well.

So with along the question James Dr. Nic asked does everyobody have to go through that if they want to be considered a committal?

Yeah, as one of the questions here is do you have to live in San Francisco to be work. We should due respect on this project. 40 full time people on it? If one the companies wanted full time committed basically they move to San Francisco.

We have development considered outside of San Francisco as well. So in New York.

Right yeah. Aside from San Francisco engineering groups. On the project I guess is that [inaudible 1:08:17].

I think what we’re doing right now Dr. Nic is that the best way to if you’re not gonna be in San Francisco dojo to send full request and we do have two full time people community taking full request non-stop and so we have a fabricated model which you can send full request from anywhere. Or you can join an active team directly. And we came really good code velocity out of that we’re help manager. Suit in about three months. We’ll soon have that in production, we executed on the project in about two and a half months. And so I think when we found a bit the whole community and fusion with IBM, one of the core things we said was we need to maintain project velocity. And so we are taking some steps doing a lot of development color dated but full requests are also very important. And I think that also the incubation process was really now we would need to send people to either IBM premise or wherever their critical mass would be to pair with them, to work with them. It’s also important that people other than Pivotal lead projects within Cloud Foundry example of that.

Ok.

Also on the question of platform conference we are holding a community design summit for BOSH. And I think one of the things is the balance between major conference and then also a frequent design and kind of highly technical session. And so I asked Tamer who’s leading BOSH PM right now and he’s holding that design summit which I believe IBM and others Dr. Nic are coming to. To come in and maybe we can use a little about that as a pattern as well more than just as big conferences.

Yeah this is Tamer, there’s a not a whole lot more to be said about it than what Watters described as which is we wanna make sure that the before we kick off the next set of work on the BOSH code base. We get a lot of input from the community to what your priorities are and also use it as a chance to find and advertise where we got them. Where we see the major shortcomings of BOSH chart. So this gonna be three hours in San Francisco on the sixth and we’re going to televise it as well somehow. Probably, I’m more worried streaming out to the community. So probably I’ll record it the video and have that video available for download shortly thereafter. But the, the point of the video is to make sure that we gather as much input from the community as possible before we make major decisions on the BOSH roadmap. In general though we try and focus on short term iterations mostly because on how quickly Pivotal actually executes on projects. So this conversation is going to mostly focus on the next three months with kinda an eye to the following 12.

Thanks Tamer. So we didn’t really quite closed in on the conference idea. Are we going to have another conference in the spring or?

I think we’re surely supportive of that. If that’s the people want. I would just wanna make sure there’s surely strong demand from folks to have a major conference every six months. I know it was a big drain on my time. A big drain on our time but I think it is also an amazing event. So the question in my mind is should we have more smaller that kind of developer oriented summit that we talk about design and technical about things. And then one big flashier business oriented conference as well a year. Or what if people really want I think if 51 people on the line it’s probably right for people to ask what we should do.

What do people think, should we have another conference in the spring?

Do you wanna make a vote on spring versus one year? My opinion is that obviously things are moving faster than space. So I kinda favor that the six months format for now but it is an effort to put any conference anywhere.

Alright.

So you actually making a vote otherwise I was about to.

I just did thanks.

Good straight man, I was typing while you were talking.

I see a lot of yes’s.

I think we all just want to spend another chance to catch-up. I mean there’s not like any of us have come from some other community where we catch-up anyway. So those are the challenges that we have now. Somewhat there’s exit into community. Where are my people and.

Is there anybody on the phone who can’t vote and want to vote on every half. If you’re voting yes, you need to vote as a response. There’s a whole bunch of yes’s but if you think on I’m sure I get to know.

Yeah, we only got a couple of those. I see Cathy in favor of some more technically focuses and one conference a year. And Cornea I think you’re saying yes but maybe not three to four day thing. I don’t…

If participant should have another one in six months. But the question is how we can move on from there?

Yeah. So, at least we should have a dialogue. I’m not sure, we’ll sort it out. Yeah, I think change gonna need some caffeine. But ok, it so seems like an overwhelming yes I think for another conference. I think we’ll start moving in a, I would hope in expect that the CAB go as significance both play in helping us coordinate this. Helping us get the core assistance. And I always expect that it will be a successful event more so than the last one. As Jeff said this is. I think this is moving very quickly and I think it is important that we sort of catch the light of Australia.

James did you have another low lier Australia.

Yeah.

Ok, we have about 10 minutest left and I think we had some really good discussions today I don’t know what others thought. But I thought that this was valuable. It would be my hope that we can have this fairly frequently. I would kinda hope monthly but...

I’m actually going on vacation for the better part of November and of course the US’s Thanksgiving and you know that impacts some of you that are in the States but this makes the better of a short month. I’m thinking maybe that we could do something about early December to have another call like this and James suggested that we could talk about the Cloud Foundry sort of trademark branding thoughts and a review and discussion around the technical criteria that James had alluded to. I can’t remember James, but there were something else but you got maybe we could read out in the next review calls. I’ll try to recall but. I think we had it in the website, I can’t remember what that was.

Yeah with the dot org transition I talked about that we hope that’s early December.

We talked about it.

Dot com, our conference is about. One of the things I mentioned. Chris I’m sorry, go ahead.

Yep, go ahead.

I just have a bit of good news. Is that Pivotal will be sponsoring a big blitz of advertisement for cloudfoundry.org and the Cloud Foundry community in November. This is Cloud Foundry’s huge bet for us as a company. I noticed the confidence as well but we’ll be sponsoring some newspaper for advertisement since the website are all over the place to promote dot org. So anything that will be on the mid of November, anything we can do to add content first before then. We may have large number of impressions of folks coming to it in mid-November. So I just thought I’d mention that. To Chris I know you have a note for me about this specifically some other opportunities but think it’s good for everyone to know about that’s coming.

That’s great.

Did everybody, is everybody comfortable with this kind of period. It’s about the only time we can do this. Not completely offensive to everybody. And we do have, for all over the globe. I would suggest we try to do something maybe the first or second week of December. Of the calendar and see what we can. What we can do. Yeah, I realized that it’s, there’s no one time that’s good for everybody so. So again I thank all the other members of the CAB for coming in and for helping discussions. And I look forward to the next time. Any closing thoughts Adrian, James? Any other members of the CAB?

Only 52 fantastic member of the people. It’s a difficult.

Yeah. I just connect ‘coz I to say that come up I think. We’ve already seen signs that this is gonna work that very valuable mechanism. I’ve read something that was said earlier on about sort of opening up opportunity to pressure the way open source project to do the right thing. This move is a fantastic illustration of a commitment to do that and I’m really working forward to what we can do together over the next six 12 months.

Thank you.

[inaudible 1:20:45]

Any other company know how to contribute?

Doc. Docs and valuable contribution as. If you have any life that you wish your company want to participate please hide the docs people.

Yes. Absolutely. Amen to more doc.

Alright. Well thanks everyone and we look forward to speak with you all next time.

Cheers.

Thank you.

[End of Transcript] 01:21:32