Skip to content

Commit bf02c4c

Browse files
authored
2025-08-20 TAC meeting notes (#1140)
Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Panisset <[email protected]>
1 parent e8545ed commit bf02c4c

File tree

1 file changed

+200
-0
lines changed

1 file changed

+200
-0
lines changed

meetings/2025-08-20.md

Lines changed: 200 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,200 @@
1+
---
2+
parent: Meetings
3+
title: "2025-08-20"
4+
---
5+
6+
# Academy Software Foundation Technical Advisory Council (TAC) Meeting - August 20, 2025
7+
8+
Join the meeting at [https://zoom-lfx.platform.linuxfoundation.org/meeting/97880950229?password=81d2940e-c055-43b9-9b5a-6cd7d7090feb](https://zoom-lfx.platform.linuxfoundation.org/meeting/97880950229?password=81d2940e-c055-43b9-9b5a-6cd7d7090feb)
9+
10+
## Voting Representative Attendees
11+
12+
### Premier Member Representatives
13+
14+
- [x] Andy Jones - Netflix, Inc.
15+
- [ ] Chris Hall - Advanced Micro Devices (AMD)
16+
- [x] Christopher Moore - Skydance Animation, LLC
17+
- [x] Eric Enderton - NVIDIA Corporation
18+
- [x] Erik Niemeyer - Intel Corporation
19+
- [ ] Gordon Bradley - Autodesk
20+
- [ ] Greg Denton - Microsoft Corporation
21+
- [x] Jean-Michel Dignard - Epic Games, Inc
22+
- [ ] Jonathan Gerber - LAIKA, LLC
23+
- [x] Kimball Thurston - Wētā FX Limited
24+
- [x] Larry Gritz - Sony Pictures Imageworks
25+
- [x] Matthew Low - DreamWorks Animation
26+
- [ ] Michael Min - Adobe Inc.
27+
- [x] Michael B. Johnson - Apple Inc.
28+
- [ ] Rebecca Bever - Walt Disney Animation Studios
29+
- [ ] Ross Dickson - Amazon Web Services, Inc.
30+
- [x] Scott Dyer - Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences
31+
- [ ] Youngkwon Lim - Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
32+
33+
### Project Representatives
34+
35+
- [x] Carol Payne - Diversity & Inclusion Working Group Representative, OpenColorIO Representative
36+
- [ ] Cary Phillips - OpenEXR Representative
37+
- [x] Chris Kulla - Open Shading Language Representative
38+
- [ ] Diego Tavares Da Silva - OpenCue Representative
39+
- [ ] Jonathan Stone - MaterialX Representative
40+
- [x] Ken Museth - OpenVDB Representative
41+
- [ ] Nick Porcino - Universal Scene Description Working Group Representative
42+
- [x] Rachel Rose - Diversity & Inclusion Working Group Representative
43+
44+
### Industry Representatives
45+
46+
- [x] Jean-Francois Panisset - Visual Effects Society
47+
48+
## Non-Voting Attendees
49+
50+
### Non-Voting Project and Working Group Representatives
51+
52+
- [x] Alexander Schwank - Universal Scene Description Working Group Representative
53+
- [x] Anton Dukhovnikov - rawtoaces Representative
54+
- [ ] Daniel Greenstein - OpenImageIO Representative
55+
- [ ] Daryll Strauss - Zero Trust Working Group Representative
56+
- [ ] David Feltell - OpenAssetIO Representative
57+
- [x] Eric Reinecke - OpenTimelineIO Representative
58+
- [ ] Erik Strauss - Open Review Initiative Representative
59+
- [x] Gary Oberbrunner - OpenFX Representative
60+
- [ ] Jean-Christophe Morin - Rez Representative
61+
- [x] Stephen Mackenzie - Rez Representative
62+
63+
### LF Staff
64+
65+
- [x] David Morin - Academy Software Foundation
66+
- [x] Emily Olin - Academy Software Foundation
67+
- [x] John Mertic - The Linux Foundation
68+
- [x] Michelle Roth - The Linux Foundation
69+
- [ ] Yarille Ortiz - The Linux Foundation
70+
71+
### Other Attendees
72+
73+
- Karen Ruggles, DeSales University
74+
- Alyssa Alexis, SIGGRAPH
75+
- Doug Walker, Autodesk / OCIO
76+
- Spencer Stephens
77+
- Bill Ballew, Dreamworks
78+
- Lee Kerley, Apple
79+
- Lorna Dumba, Framestore
80+
- John McCarten, Weta
81+
- JT Nelson, Pasadena Open Source consortium / SoCal Blender group
82+
- Josh Bainbridge, Framestore
83+
- Olga Avramenko, Imageworks / D&I
84+
- Robin Rowe, Cinepaint
85+
- Tommy Burnette, ILM / ML WG
86+
87+
## Antitrust Policy Notice
88+
89+
Linux Foundation meetings involve participation by industry competitors, and it
90+
is the intention of the Linux Foundation to conduct all of its activities in
91+
accordance with applicable antitrust and competition laws. It is therefore
92+
extremely important that attendees adhere to meeting agendas, and be aware of,
93+
and not participate in, any activities that are prohibited under applicable US
94+
state, federal or foreign antitrust and competition laws.
95+
96+
Examples of types of actions that are prohibited at Linux Foundation meetings
97+
and in connection with Linux Foundation activities are described in the Linux
98+
Foundation Antitrust Policy available at
99+
[linuxfoundation.org/antitrust-policy](https://www.linuxfoundation.org/antitrust-policy).
100+
If you have questions about these matters, please contact your company counsel,
101+
or if you are a member of the Linux Foundation, feel free to contact Andrew
102+
Updegrove of the firm of Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to
103+
the Linux Foundation.
104+
105+
## Agenda
106+
107+
- General Updates
108+
- Rename project lifecycle stage 'Adopted' to 'Graduated' [#999](https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/tac/pull/999)
109+
- Propose to remove vote for annual reviews [#1016](https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/tac/pull/1016)
110+
- Dev Days - September 25th [#1134](https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/tac/issues/1134)
111+
112+
## Notes
113+
114+
- Open Source Days Poll - David
115+
- what are your highlights?
116+
- what could be improved?
117+
- using a new polling system, woodclap.com used by Moment Factory, code OSD2025
118+
- Can generate a wordcloud from entries and rankings
119+
- List your highlights of Open Source Days and rank the listings of others
120+
- Single stream of content
121+
- Quality of presentations
122+
- The whole day
123+
- Good remote a/v quality
124+
- Seeing everyone in person / interactivity from presentations, zoom is too serialized for true interactions
125+
- Nice surrounding area to congregate and chat between presentations
126+
- Snacks
127+
- Lunch was a great idea
128+
- CBB: what can we improve at open source days, rank the answers of others
129+
- Recordings of the BoFs (David: rules of SIGGRAPH)
130+
- Line to get into beers of a feather
131+
- Beers venue too small
132+
- More umbrellas / sun shade for Beers of a Feather
133+
- Not repeat material from DigiPro
134+
- Flow Presentation was a kind of repeat
135+
- Larry: we worked hard to make them distinct presentations!
136+
- David: we benefited from DigiPro presentation being a kind of rehearsal. But we need to differentiate our content compared to DigiPro
137+
138+
- Hard to choose between Sunday Siggraph sessions and Open Source Days
139+
- SIGGRAPH courses (Physically Based Shading)
140+
- If you sat near the doors, the talking outside was distracting relative to the (reasonable) audio levels in the room
141+
- More time for BoFs
142+
- Beers of a Feather competed with Papers Fast Forward - Larry: not suggesting there is a better day
143+
- Larry: the room was fairly full, but were any presentations where people couldn't come in?
144+
- Emily: there were people in overflow room in the morning, but we closed it around noon.
145+
- Larry: seems the room size was perfect
146+
- Wave: every SIGGRAPH BoF room was too small! Larry: lots of complaints all week. But we did well.
147+
- David: it's our missing to support our projects, we intend to continue to do it this way and support our BoFs.
148+
- Carol: for OCIO BoF there was some feedback that the room as "too big" and didn't promote conversation, but rather have too much room than not enough. David: we can close some of the rows.
149+
- Passing microphones around is disruptive.
150+
- Wave: Access in/out from side doors was distracting, SIGGRAPH usually has only a single door in the back. So would be helpful to only have a single door. Larry: especially once the session starts.
151+
- Carol: a lot of this is controlled through volunteers. We have new folks through SLP, maybe they could help in a similar capacity.
152+
- Emily: we could try to recruit volunteers to help with registration and checkin. Carol: we can offer swag, we can't offer the same benefits as SIGGRAPH, but can do other things.
153+
- David: thank you for your feedback on Open Source Days!
154+
- Larry: SIGGRAPH is composed of a lot of overlapping groups, the people who know about Open Source is a narrow slice of people involved with the studios. Not sure how much other people knew that OSD was happening without already being "on the inside". Do we want more publicity? My son was a student volunteer, and talking to other volunteers, they had never heard of it.
155+
- Emily: should we bring back a BoF geared towards students to present careers. Carol: would prefer something like that, maybe a D&I BoF. D&I group has worked with student volunteers, but it was on Thursday, how do we get into these groups before so we can encourage them to come to OSD.
156+
- Emily: what are the groups? Is there a segment we are missing and would be beneficial for the foundation? Then we can do a better job of targeting them. Larry: students is where I had a direct data point, but people outside the narrow world of film studios in our projects, they may not know we have activities.
157+
- Karen taking over D&I leadership responsibilities, academia / students will be "top of mind"
158+
159+
- General Updates
160+
- Rename project lifecycle stage 'Adopted' to 'Graduated' [#999](https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/tac/pull/999)
161+
- Larry: Orthogonal to whether the project is already "widely adopted" in the industry.
162+
- Carol: last time we argued if "graduated" is the right word. But we would like to move forward with this.
163+
- Eric: also can't think of a different word.
164+
- Propose to remove vote for annual reviews [#1016](https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/tac/pull/1016)
165+
- Larry: go on the assumption a project will renew at current stage, unless a problem is identified and the TAC needs to tackle it and help the project get back on track.
166+
- Carol: we wouldn't vote unless a project needs to change stage. No vote needed to stay at a current stage.
167+
- Larry: assumes that TAC members feel they can call out if they feel project is at the wrong stage or if there are issues / areas that need to be remedied.
168+
- Larry: we will send these to LFX
169+
- Carol: we are preferring LFX votes instead of "live in the room" votes, that's been on purpose.
170+
- John: any concerns? Alexander: no concerns, would be good to have this written down so it's clear "when we do what", for instance in person vs LFX votes. Carol: it's our intention to be clearer about which we do, not sure when do we need to do an in person vote. Eric: what's the motivation for online? Carol: for people who miss the meeting, also feel comfortable saying something different. Larry: motivation seems rushed to have a presentation / air an issue and have a vote right away 2 minutes before end of the meeting. Not enough time to consider the issue / do any research. Carol: we should put in documentation that for new projects we would have a TAC meeting after the presentation, and only then got to LFX vote to have time to discuss.
171+
172+
- Larry: will send to the TAC channel links to spreadsheets about engineering contributions from their organizations
173+
- build matrix with versions of projects in use, allows projects to know what they need to support
174+
- engineering contribution matrix where we ask the member companies which projects are critical to you and which projects are you putting in substantial contributions
175+
- Trying to see if these are in balance and if any projects are starved for resources. Spreadsheets haven't been updated in a while, mostly from last year. So please have someone from your org or project update these so we can do an annual assessment.
176+
- Read-only links, first tab of spreadsheet has editable links
177+
- [Google Doc](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTpv49Yj79yfWYyfJBtmCjSIbQZrpYwNtzvtCXyJinIGo2q9j57namFYGbM_v7LdQTbDZyJQBvECglJ/pubhtml)
178+
- [contributionmatrix.aswf.io redirect](http://contributionmatrix.aswf.io/)
179+
180+
- Dev Days 2025 - Olga
181+
- We want to increase participation, targeting both junior and senior devs
182+
- important that projects are fully set up before event
183+
- issues must be labeled with Help Wanted so they show up on Clotributor web site
184+
- issues must be open, unassigned and opened in the last year
185+
- Look at the project guidelines page on Confluence
186+
- Carol: [LF Clotributor](https://clotributor.dev) filter to ASWF
187+
- This is what we point people to if they want to find issues for Dev Days
188+
- Tagging with Help Wanted is the minimum to show up, can add other tags like `Good First Issue`. Clotributor doesn't show every tag, only the ones it is familiar with. You can look at how projects are using tags. We've used `Good First Issue` to bring in new developers, but some people may not be new to Open Source but just new to your project, so just having `Help Wanted` is helpful.
189+
- There is a time limit, if you haven't updated an issue in a year, it will drop off Clotributor to keep issues "fresh".
190+
- OCIO has tons of older than 1yr issue, they would need to be refreshed.
191+
- Larry: are there recommended tags for the "good first issue for experience contributor", not sure we have to have a uniform label across all projects? Carol: open to ideas, don't want to enforce something across projects. We'd like to hear if something works well for a project. Larry: MaterialX doing a great job to "keep issues in the hopper", they had the most contributors in the last Dev Days.
192+
- Carol: reminder to tag issues with labels, and tag PRs with `devdays25` label (this is documented in Confluence). At org level this allows us to track what PRs were submitted as part of Dev Days. We'll do the work of separating Spring and Fall PRs.
193+
- Any tricks for repos in order orgs like DPEL org? John: it should be, we're careful to track every repo due to GitHub API issues. If not showing up, let us know and we may need to add manually. Matthew: OpenVDB also just moved to their own org. How often does it update? John: not sure, but seems to show up quickly? Carol: maybe 2 hours?
194+
- Carol: curious about projects moving to own org? Matthew: for DPEL we thought every project might get its own DPEL, and clearly affiliated with DPEL. For OpenVDB they are adding NanoVDB, NerfVDB. Ken: that's correct, also some of the projects are a staging ground and may have different governance. TSC focuses on core project, and have incubation platform for some of the other projects. Matthew: works from administrative standpoint, ASWF is an Enterprise in GitHub and can "own" multiple orgs, so billing / runners works. But there are corner cases like Clotributor. Carol: yes was concerned about discoverability. If we allow / encourage projects to move to their own org, still want to make sure captured by Clotributor. John: we also have many projects using Clotributor, and sometimes we hit GitHub API limits. Shouldn't be an issue for ASWF, there are other foundations that have a lot more repos.
195+
- Carol: DevDays is a month away, want everyone to be excited about it. Same approach as in the spring: if you are an ASWF project, you are participating in Dev Days, output depends on how easily people can be onboarded, and how much effort projects put into it. It can take resources to do these projects, if you need help reach out to us, we'll be happy to help.
196+
- Olga: please do ask if you have questions.
197+
198+
- Eric: was there an announcement for OpenQMC vote? John: yes, the vote was approved, but we may have missed sending to Slack. Josh: thank you for the help, excited to be at the incubation stage? Carol: we have to find a new thing to ask Eric at every meeting
199+
200+
- John: we will present OpenLensIO at next meeting.

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)