[ros-users] [Discourse.ros.org] [General] ROS 2 TSC Meeting …

    -   Expected:
        -   Open Robotics
            -   Tully Foote, Brian Gerkey, Chris Lalancette, Louise Poubel, Dirk Thomas, William Woodall
        -   Amazon
            -   Doug Fulop
        -   Apex.ai
            -   Dejan Pangercic
        -   Arm
            -   Matt Spencer
        -   Bosch
            -   Karsten Knese
            -   Christian
        -   Denso
            -   Jens Wawerla
        -   Intel
            -   Peter Adams, Matt Hansen, Kelly Hammond, Greg Burns
        -   LG
            -   Seonman Kim
        -   Microsoft
            -   Lou Amadio
        -   TARDEC
            -   Phil Frederick
            -   Bill Thomasmeyer
        -   TRI
            -   Allison Thackston
    -   Get situated and sort out comms issues
    -   Brian briefly introduces the participants
    -   Brian briefly sets context for the meeting
    -   Present and discuss the draft TSC charter, with proposed amendments, including:
        -   How should the TSC have bidirectional comms with community?
            -   Possibly an open Discourse thread.
            -   Look at a protected Category, public read, TSC only write.
        -   How are member reps designated? Free choice, key code contributors, or something else?
            -   Err on the side of caution to set the ground rules up front. Its better to have a process to remove someone from the committee. Changing the rules is pretty painful.
            -   Representative people will change providing different personalities
            -   TSC could determine what is a significant contribution.
            -   Keeping diversity is important, different branches of robotics. (Cars, drones, indoor...)
            -   There should be a designee, but could send a proxy. (Theres only really a significant issue if theres a vote.)
            -   Person should have some oversight of the roadmap at the company
            -   Representing lots of distributed government contributions is potentially a challenge.
        -   Which repos/orgs constitute the project for the purpose of making contributions?
            -   Something thats seen as beneficial to the community. (needs clarification)
        -   How many orgs currently qualify for membership? Should we cap TSC size?
            -   Proposal: make working groups (WGs) for specific topics and to keep the TSC itself smaller.
                -   A consensus beyond 20 is hard to get.
                -   In the future we could raise the threshold of FTEs to keep the group from growing too much.
                -   Are there ways to make sure to keep smaller companies voices so they dont get squeezed out.
                -   Some companies want a small platform level engagement.
                -   Seniority could be taken into account.
                -   Could use subcommittees who designate a representative.
                -   A standard procedure for generating working groups can help provide a hierarchy to let more focused projects/topics.
        -   Procedures:
            -   Quorum size, proxy mechanism, ejection procedure
                -   Were all here with good intentions, but at some point theres likely some conflict that will come up and should be planned for.
    -   Approve and publish the charter.
    -   Open Robotics will take this feedback and recirculate the TSC Charter.
    -   Proposal: require DCO for future ROS 2 development ([*https://developercertificate.org/*](https://developercertificate.org/)).
        -   Consider use of an automated system for tracking DCOs on PRs like the Probot DCO app for GitHub ([*https://github.com/apps/dco*](https://github.com/apps/dco)).
        -   Consider retroactively getting DCOs for previous contributions.
            -   The pain of CLAs is quite a lot of pain.
            -   Its well automated, but there is overhead to get permission and teach new contributors.
            -   Need clarity about which repositories require this? Community contributed repos?
            -   Current DCO allows compatible licenses, risk of MIT code coming into a project. (Could clarify this under the contribution guide). Issue will come up with BSD 3-clause ROS1 imports
    -   Committing policies
        -   2FA on repos
        -   Signed commits
        -   Implement this and make it the recommendation.
    -   Proposal: Open Robotics to apply for a trademark on the ROS 2 name and/or logo (do we have an agreed upon logo?).
        -   Focus on ROS (2 is just a version) dont want to embed the version in the mark.
            -   Follow up with lawyers also ask them about other things that might be attached
        -   Discuss policy for use of the name/logo and plans for enforcement.
            -   ROS2 Certified/compatible (TSC certified) -- would need a process. Could become a working group.
    -   Add Coverity (or similar) scanning
        -   IP Scanning is top priority
        -   Static analysis is also important, especially security scanning.
        -   This would be good for a working group.(IP and technical aspects are possibly separable)
        -   There is overhead for developers.
        -   TARDEC already has some security analysis already going too.
    -   Discuss TSC meeting frequency
        -   Starting out, monthly might not be enough.
        -   Overtime we might be able to back off to quarterly.
        -   For the short term release there might be value to a bi-weekly meeting.
            -   Possibly a separate group for tracking progress
            -   Can escalate to strategic process
    -   Open the floor for proposals to introduce or amend other policies.
    -   Dirk presents the Open Robotics roadmap for ROS 2 Crystal (December 2018):
        -   [https://github.com/ros2/ros2/wiki/Roadmap](https://github.com/ros2/ros2/wiki/Roadmap)
        -   How can we accelerate a specific project/roadmap item? Do we need to vote?
            -   How do we oversee contributions?
            -   Should Open Robotics be allocating resources to oversee external contributions to make sure that they are acceptable.
                -   Definitely for TSC members. Clear deliverables and approach. Design work to make sure that we dont box ourselves in.
    -   Discuss and take questions on the current roadmap.
    -   Open the floor for proposals to amend the roadmap, including:
        -   Which platforms to support (Ubuntu version(s), QNX, macOS, Windows)
        -   Should Open Robotics explicitly allocate people / time to coordinate development at other orgs?
            -   This would be valuable for TSC coordination/contributions.
        -   Are there realtime targets for this cycle?
            -   Currently laying groundwork
            -   Functional safety is important to several members
        -   TurtleBot packages
            -   Intel and Amazon are both interested
            -   TurtleBot3 in simulation would be valuable.
            -   TurtleBot2 port is partial. Beta2 demo worked.
            -   Would like this available for testing navigation
            -   depth\_image\_to\_laserscan
        -   navigation
            -   Intel -- want to have something by Crystal
            -   Amazon
            -   TRI
            -   Worth a working group.
            -   blocked by actions, for a full port
        -   Dynamic memory allocation
            -   Apex
        -   Shared memory transport and performance
            -   Apex
            -   LG
        -   Not complete DDS implementations (FastRTPS)
            -   Alex
        -   Security related improvements
            -   ARM Amazon
        -   Possibly a working group on middleware
        -   Web based visualization tool
            -   TRI
        -   Gazebo
            -   TRI
        -   Microcontroller support
            -   ARM
        -   Heterogeneous computing
            -   ARM
            -   Denso (arm32)
            -   Microsoft (arm32)
        -   General platform support
            -   16.04 Xenial Support
                -   Apex
            -   How do we determine the goal platforms
            -   Potentially infinite work with
            -   Reference architectures, such as TB3
                -   Include compute and
            -   Qt has a possible model
                -   Tier 1 platforms all fully tested
                -   Tier 2 platforms are only tested periodically.
                -   Tier 3 platforms will probably work but they dont test them
                -   Amazon is interested
                -   Possible approach
                    -   Tier 1 support requires contributions
                    -   Tiier 2 can be added but only tested at release time
        -   It would be good to fill in extra FTEs in the roadmap
        -   How should we organize the work?
            -   Trying to do the work in the open.
                -   Discourse/github issues
        -   Open robotics cant oversee the process, the TSC can charter new working groups. It would be good to have Open Robotics in working groups. Can provide high level strategic feedback/vision.
        -   It would be good to have some oversight of migration techniques.
    -   Approve and publish the roadmap.

This message is part of the following thread:
	the complete thread tree sorted by date

	Geoffrey Biggs via ros-users at