## 2024-05-21

### Attendees

- Wojciech Barczynski ([@wojciech12](https://github.com/wojciech12))
- Igor Savchenko ([@DiscyDel](https://github.com/DicsyDel))
- Zach Goldberg ([@ZachGoldberg](https://github.com/ZachGoldberg))
- Roni Frantchi ([@roni-frantchi](https://github.com/roni-frantchi))
- Roger Simms ([@allofthesepeople](https://github.com/allofthesepeople))

### Agenda

#### Christian Mesh, new Tech Lead of OpenTofu project

##### Discussion

- What is the definition of this role? Responsibilities?
- Who should define the roles/responsibilities?
- The team is very focused on 1.8, we do not want to context switch them to bureaucratic tasks.
- We might want to write down the TL's responsibilities after 1.8.x.

##### Decision

All in favor (WB, IS, ZG, RF, and RS)

#### Backend-as-Plugins

Continuation of the discussion from 2024-05-07.

##### Discussion

- A written-down product/project vision would help us to make decisions on topics such as e.g. backends as plugins.
- Do we need a RFC in order to vote on something as a steering committee?

  - Want to avoid appearance of bias as TACOs putting thumb on the scale for the roadmap
  - Is there a chicken-egg — companies want the idea to be accepted before investing in RFC, and the steering committee similarly wants a real RFC before agreeing.

- Backends as Plugins

  - @Roni Frantchi - Not convinced this is the right solution or something really worth prioritizing

  - @Igor Savchenko - it really needs an RFC for us to know what we’re voting on, it’s too abstract right now

  - @Roni Frantchi - if the steering committee says “OK lets see an RFC” is that actually interpreted as a green light for the community - once the RFC is up we’d move on it?

##### Decision

We cannot vote without a RFC.

