Shuah, we have 2 branched email threads now.
See comments and consensus on Philip's suggestion (Linux features for safety-critical systems).
What do you think of that? It is also a combi of 2 and 5.
Regards
Elana
-----Original Message-----
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 7:23 PM
To: Elana Copperman <Elana.Copperman@...>; development-process@...; devel@...; Paul Albertella <paul.albertella@...>; Shuah Khan <skhan@...>
Subject: Re: [ELISA Development Process WG] Proposed new WG
Hi Elana,
On 9/29/21 8:15 AM, elana.copperman@... wrote:

Following today's TSC call and discussion, the new WG proposed in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1557IyH66OlMJHklNg5wceKmJLQgavBUwoYyB2Jib0vU/edit# <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:

1. Linux Developers
2. Linux features for safety
3. Linux features amenable for safety 4. Safety engineering features
5. Linux-based elements for safety-critical systems

I like parts of 2 & 5.
2 as it talks about features and 5 because it includes the Linux kernel features as well as other Linux ecosystem elements that form the platform/basis for the safety critical systems and environments.
The following describes the scope more clearly.
Linux-based components/elements for safety-critical systems
Assuming Linux = Linux kernel in the context. It is clear to me and hope ii will be clear to others (non-ELISA) as well.
thanks,
-- Shuah