To Assuage Fears of Google Domination, Istio Restructures Its Steering Committee (thenewstack.io) 10
An anonymous reader quotes The New Stack:
While there are some who may never get over the fact that the Istio service mesh, originally created by Google and IBM, will not be handed over to the Cloud Native Computing Foundation, the project took a big step this past week to assuage those who critiqued the project for being under a Google-majority control: Istio has introduced a new Istio steering committee.
According to the blog post, the new steering committee will consist of 13 seats, with four "elected Community Seats" and nine "proportionally allocated Contribution Seats," a change they say "solidifies our commitment to open governance, ensuring that the community around the project will always be able to steer its direction, and that no one company has majority voting control over the project." This final point is really the key to the announcement here, with them further and more explicitly clarifying later that "no single vendor, no matter how large their contribution, has majority voting control over the Istio project." To this end, they write, they have "implemented a cap on the number of seats a company can hold, such that they can neither unanimously win a vote, or veto a decision of the rest of the committee."
As for how those seats are allocated, the four Community Seats will consist of four representatives from four different organizations and will be chosen in an annual election. The nine Contribution Seats will be assigned to a minimum of three different companies "in proportion to contributions made to Istio in the previous 12 months," with this year's metric being merged pull requests.
But not everyone was satisfied. On Twitter AWS engineer Matthew S. Wilson called it "a crappy way to build a community," objecting to the way it's recognizing and rewarding open source contributions by company rather than by the individuals.
And Knative co-founder Matt Moore called it "what you get when a company wants to 'play community', but treat its employees as interchangeable cogs."
According to the blog post, the new steering committee will consist of 13 seats, with four "elected Community Seats" and nine "proportionally allocated Contribution Seats," a change they say "solidifies our commitment to open governance, ensuring that the community around the project will always be able to steer its direction, and that no one company has majority voting control over the project." This final point is really the key to the announcement here, with them further and more explicitly clarifying later that "no single vendor, no matter how large their contribution, has majority voting control over the Istio project." To this end, they write, they have "implemented a cap on the number of seats a company can hold, such that they can neither unanimously win a vote, or veto a decision of the rest of the committee."
As for how those seats are allocated, the four Community Seats will consist of four representatives from four different organizations and will be chosen in an annual election. The nine Contribution Seats will be assigned to a minimum of three different companies "in proportion to contributions made to Istio in the previous 12 months," with this year's metric being merged pull requests.
But not everyone was satisfied. On Twitter AWS engineer Matthew S. Wilson called it "a crappy way to build a community," objecting to the way it's recognizing and rewarding open source contributions by company rather than by the individuals.
And Knative co-founder Matt Moore called it "what you get when a company wants to 'play community', but treat its employees as interchangeable cogs."
Already tainted (Score:1)
So what's your superior solution approach? (Score:2)
Actually not that bad as an FP, though I would be strained to give it a positive mod point. You force the reader to seek the insight. [Moot since I never get a mod point these years, and I still have no idea why. Unless Taco hard-coded me?]
I actually fantasize that I have a better solution approach. Obviously not, but I wish someone would point out why not. Since wishes are fishes, I'll go ahead and review my solution approach and feebly hope someone can (finally) tell me what's wrong with it.
I'd like to se
new Istio steering committee (Score:1)
Old baldheads and rich young punks. All performing "Community"® service ~
here's a spoon (Score:2)
Here's a spoon for the buzzword soup you are about to ingest.
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell is Istio, and who the hell is Assuage.
Good call! (Score:2)
It's like when you're in a bus and there's a committee 'steering' it.
What the hell is Istio? (Score:3)
Steering committee (Score:2)
A steering committee is five people fighting to control the wheel while the car is headed for a cliff. Nobody remembers how to work the brake.
What Istio is: (Score:5, Informative)
link: https://www.ibm.com/cloud/lear... [ibm.com]
Istio is a configurable, open source service-mesh layer that connects, monitors, and secures the containers in a Kubernetes cluster. At this writing, Istio works natively with Kubernetes only, but its open source nature makes it possible for anyone to write extensions enabling Istio to run on any cluster software. Today, we'll focus on using Istio with Kubernetes, its most popular use case.