Academy Software Foundation - Technical Advisory Council (TAC) Meeting - November 15, 2023

Join the meeting at

Voting member attendance

Premier member Representatives

  • Bill Roberts - Adobe Inc.
  • Brian Cipriano - Google LLC
  • Cory Omand - The Walt Disney Studios
  • Eric Enderton - NVIDIA Corporation
  • Eric Reinecke - Netflix, Inc.
  • Erik Niemeyer - Intel Corporation
  • Esteban Papp - Amazon Web Services, Inc.
  • Gordon Bradley - Autodesk
  • Greg Denton - Microsoft Corporation
  • Jean-Michel Dignard - Epic Games, Inc
  • Kimball Thurston - Weta Digital Limited
  • Larry Gritz - Sony Pictures Imageworks
  • Mark Visser - Unity Technologies
  • Matthew Low - DreamWorks Animation
  • Michael B Johnson - Apple Inc.
  • Scott Dyer - Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences
  • Sean O’Connell - Advanced Micro Devices (AMD)
  • Tony Micilotta - DNEG

Project Representatives

  • Carol Payne - OpenColorIO Representative
  • Cary Phillips - OpenEXR Representative
  • Chris Kulla - Open Shading Language (OSL) Representative
  • Jonathan Stone - MaterialX Representative
  • Joshua Minor - OpenTimelineIO Representative
  • Ken Museth - OpenVDB Representative

Industry Representatives

  • Jean-Francois Panisset - Visual Effects Society

Non Voting Projects, Working Groups, Linux Foundation

  • Alexander Forsythe - RAW to ACES Utility Representative
  • Alexander Schwank - USD Working Group Representative
  • Daniel Greenstein - OpenImageIO Representative
  • Erik Strauss - Open Review Initiative Representative
  • Gary Oberbrunner - OpenFX Representative
  • Jean-Christophe Morin - Rez Representative
  • Nick Porcino - USD Working Group Representative
  • Rachel Rose - D&I Working Group Representative
  • Scott Wilson - Working Group for Rust Bindings Representative
  • Stephen Mackenzie - Rez Representative
  • Tom Cowland - OpenAssetIO Representative
  • David Morin - Academy Software Foundation
  • Emily Olin - Academy Software Foundation
  • John Mertic - The Linux Foundation
  • Yarille Kilborn - The Linux Foundation

Other Attendees

  • Darin Grant, Animal Logic / ASWF
  • JT Nelson, Pasadena Open Source consortium / SoCal Blender group
  • Joseph Goldstone, ARRI
  • Lee Kerley, Sony Imageworks
  • Timothy Porter
  • Ben Giles, Caligra
  • Ben Schofield
  • Doug Walker, Autodesk / OCIO
  • Daniel Heckenberg, Netflix
  • Dhruv Gorvil, Apple


  • Scott Wilson - Working Group for Rust Bindings Representative
  • Cary Phillips - OpenEXR Representative

Antitrust Policy Notice

Linux Foundation meetings involve participation by industry competitors, and it is the intention of the Linux Foundation to conduct all of its activities in accordance with applicable antitrust and competition laws. It is therefore extremely important that attendees adhere to meeting agendas, and be aware of, and not participate in, any activities that are prohibited under applicable US state, federal or foreign antitrust and competition laws.

Examples of types of actions that are prohibited at Linux Foundation meetings and in connection with Linux Foundation activities are described in the Linux Foundation Antitrust Policy available at If you have questions about these matters, please contact your company counsel, or if you are a member of the Linux Foundation, feel free to contact Andrew Updegrove of the firm of Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to the Linux Foundation.


  • TAC Chairperson and Industry Representative re-election #537 (John)
  • Hosted Projects Resource Request Process #461 (Darin Grant)
  • Guidance/input to Apple re: Uniform Type Identifiers for the various ASWF projects - they are akin to MIME types (Druv Govil / Michael B. Johnson
  • Project Proposal - OpenQMC #434
  • Transition to LFX Meeting Management #460 (John)
  • Project Proposal - OpenQMC #434


  • TAC Chairperson and Industry Representative re-election #537 (John)
    • 2 things we do: TAC has ability to appoint up to 3 industry representatives, currently only JF, doing it for many years, TAC would need to renew this, perhaps in December meeting
    • TAC reviews chair person annually, see if someone else might be interested. Kimball has done it for 3 years, Daniel before. If someone is interested, Kimball would be happy to yield. Goal would be to dig into this in meeting on the 29th, see if we need to open up an election
  • Hosted Projects Resource Request Process #461 (Darin Grant)
    • A bit of a repeat to presentation to Governing Board, looking at next year’s budget
    • ASWF has a reasonable surplus, around $900K
    • We are growing membership, and thus revenue
    • Want the business as usual running to fit within revenue to maintain surplus
    • Why maintain a surplus? Rather than business as usual to eat into surplus, want to make sure TAC can give guidance of what we should invest in. Invest based on TAC (or Governing Board) requests, for instance D&I efforts. Want a clear process for anyone from the TAC or projects to request ASWF to invest in.
    • Link to proposal
    • Budget committee meets once a month to review and approve
    • Examples: infrastructure needs, skill needs, good
    • John: some requests may require funding on the back end, or bring in a tool or skill we already have in Linux Foundation, sometimes there are similar needs from different foundations.
    • Darin: there’s a large portion of budget dedicated to IT services, can be a bit opaque, that team wrote up what they actually do as a result of this funding, looking at that gives an idea what’s in scope for funding.
    • Darin: was really insightful in understanding what is done, for instance how to get AWS, GitHub credits (LF IT/RE Services Key Contributions document, document link to follow)
    • Ben Giles: currently working on Wayland color management, how do we help that effort? Darin: that’s a request for spend, we steer away from bug bounties or things like that. What form would such a resource request be? Ben: as part of VFX Reference Platform, maybe a SIG under that organization, dealing with transition from X11 to Wayland. If Caligara was to drive this effort, what sort of resources could we have access to, for instance a GSoC like effort?
    • John: this process is designed for project currently under ASWF. How to bring a new effort under ASWF, and what would be resources available?
    • Ben: we started an effort, some talk previously. It’s about continuing that effort, what would it look like concretely. David: would this be the workstation working group? Ben: yes, Workstation Experience group as well. We would be willing to help drive both of these efforts, including hiring people. But would need requirements and advice, something to work towards. We want it to be a cross industry effort.
    • Darin: Working Group structure in ASWF is likely the right place for such an effort. Ben: that seems indeed like the right place. John: will follow up.
    • JF: expect requests for new CI runner types: Apple Silicon, ARM Linux, GPU, larger runners…
    • Darin: hopefully LF pull can help reduce the cost
    • John: Andrew Grimberg has been working with GitHub to gain beta (free for now) access to new runners. Also was able to work with AWS for DPEL to get cloud requests, equivalent to around $25K of AWS credits, helps to offset other areas of the budget.
    • John: as you may have resource needs, we often have access to those resources, we have existing agreements we can leverage so we can get those services for our projects
    • John: if you come to us first, we can often help, combine efforts, tap into other work the LF is doing
    • Darin: skill need: JT mentioned in chat for-pay testing services. Documentation another possible area. Could also use project management skills, these could all be interesting to explore.
    • John: we tend not to advise projects to hire direct development staff, tends to stifle the ability of a project to scale, costs are high. But specialty needs can often tap into existing skills: documentation, training, events. QA and Project Management could be interesting to explore, some of our larger foundations have “community architects”. If there’s a broad need out there, we could figure out what that looks like. That’s what I’ve seen most success with, less so with dev resources.
    • John: will package this and present it to the board for approval, hoping to have process up in running in next few weeks.
  • Guidance/input to Apple re: Uniform Type Identifiers for the various ASWF projects - they are akin to MIME types (Druv Govil / Michael B. Johnson
    • Apple looking for guidance on naming convention for Uniform Type Identifiers
    • Druv: on Apple platforms, we use MIME types at the system level identifiers: com.pixar.universalscenedescription
    • Was hoping to register something like io.aswf.materialx for instance, but is there an alternate naming convention? Normally it’s the opposite of the web site order
    • Currently OpenEXR is
    • Anyone has thoughts? Is io.aswf correct?
    • Eric R: on OTIO we’ve done tinkering with MEME, we’ve used, would be nice to have guidance on what we want to do generally, brings up the question of what a project does in the future if it leaves the aswf? Wave: don’t have to pick just one, what Druv is looking for is what the top level should look like? Should it be io.aswf.project? org.aswf.project? OTIO issue discussion
    • Eric E: are there other io. types? Druv: there aren’t others, but there are other org. for instance org.khronos.gltf
    • [Uniform Type Identifier](,class%20or%20type%20of%20item)
    • Dhruv: uttype --all to list existing types
    • Gordon: we don’t own and there’s something else there, so we should go with io.aswf
    • John: we should add a document in the TAC site to capture this if the intention is to have projects align, happy to help with, just need help since don’t know the right words.
    • Ben: same with GNOME / GTK, they have the same thing, they need the same Java-style reverse DNS style identifiers
    • Wave: we want a convention that also makes sense on Windows and Linux
    • John: proposal seems to be well received, want to submit a proposal? Wave: yes, Druv and I will submit something.
  • Project Proposal - OpenQMC #434
  • Transition to LFX Meeting Management #460 (John)
    • Only OpenCue and OpenEXR left to move over, all others are moved over
    • Will get insight on attendance, thank you for the support
  • Project Proposal - OpenQMC #434
    • Eric Enderton: got someone to take a look, NVIDIA has no problems with it, talking to NVIDIA legal to see if we can put something in the repo to state this, but expect this to be fine
    • John: that was what the TAC was looking for, statement from NVIDIA
    • John: good progress!