[TAB Meeting][Private] 2026-09-14

[jrsapi]

Host:
Note Taker:

Recurring Items

• LF Antitrust Policy
• Review TAB Work Board

Agenda

• Minimum depth bar for Reference Architecture and Case Study submissions used as Due Diligence adopter interview substitutes

  Background: The TOC now lets a published TAB Reference Architecture (and soon, a CNCF Case Study) substitute for an individual adopter interview during project Due Diligence. That only works if RA/case study submissions reliably carry interview grade evidence, and today they don't. Asking the TAB to set a minimum depth bar for submissions.

  docs(operations): adopter submission form link and TAB reference architecture substitution toc#2256 (merged) added the original TAB Reference Architecture substitution to the TOC's Due Diligence guide: a project's inclusion in a published RA "may serve as a replacement for an individual adopter interview."

  docs(operations): allow CNCF Case Study as adopter interview substitute toc#2282 (open) extends the same substitution to CNCF Case Studies, with the same "may serve as a replacement" language.

  Neither the merged DD guide text nor the TAB's own RA submission process currently requires any minimum depth for a submission to count as adopter interview equivalent evidence, and there's no cap on how many of the required interviews a single project can satisfy this way.

• Should we differentiate or stagger the release of overlapping AI-infra reference architecture submissions ([Reference Architecture] One Heterogeneous Compute Pool, Two Workload Types: How China Merchants Bank Unified Training and Inference on Kubernetes #140 China Merchants Bank vs NB Bank: Building a Full-stack Cloud-native AI Service System Based on Kubernetes and HAMi #141 Bank of Ningbo) before either reaches a publication PR?

Carried forward from #148 (2026-08-24 meeting had no quorum; 2026-08-31 skipped as a 5th Monday; 2026-09-07 skipped as Labor Day).