Following today's TSC call and discussion, the new WG proposed in
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1557IyH66OlMJHklNg5wceKmJLQgavBUwoYyB2Jib0vU/edit# has been tentatively approved. Thanks to all (especially Lukas and Paul) for your support.
See below, the preliminary list of suggested names:
Linux features for safety
Linux features amenable for safety
Safety engineering features
Linux-based elements for safety-critical systems
Applying Linux features
Actually I don't really prefer any of these names, so would offer a prize to the winning name, allowing additional suggestions to be raised.
All those subscribed to this mailing list are cordially invited to vote on (or suggest any new) names for the new WG.
Elana will extend a call for collaboration in tomorrow's session at the Linux Security Summit, including a call for participation in the newly formed WG. I would ask to have a tentative agreement (via email) on the name for the WG by tomorrow if possible,
the name can be updated later before meetings actually begin.
Elana will issue a proposal to present the new WG at the upcoming ELISA workshop (proposal deadline is this coming Friday). The proposal will be high level, and we have agreed to continue this discussion at the next TSC meeting to refine / clarify some of
the remaining open points. However, the basic format and concept as summarized in the WG proposal (see above link) is not expected to be changed in any major way. For example, we need to agree on how to avoid misunderstanding and provide a clear disclaimer
on any safety claims related to the technical suggestions made by the WG. In addition (as discussed today), all technical features will be clarified within the context of a specific use case, while at the same time understanding the limitations of NDAs and
exposure of proprietary details of business applications.