Open Horizon Annual Review - Stage 2 - 2025-03-27

2 TAC Sponsors, if identified (Sponsors help mentor projects) - See full definition on Project Stages: Definitions and Expectations

Meets

Erik Nordmark, Zededa

Anil Vishnoi, Red Hat

The typical IP Policy for Projects under the LF Edge Foundation is Apache 2.0 for Code Contributions, Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO) for new inbound contributions, and Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License for Documentation. Projects under outside licenses may still submit for consideration, subject to review/approval of the TAC and Board.

Meets

Open

Code repositories use Apache 2.0

Documentation uses CC-by-4.0

Upon acceptance, At Large projects must list their status prominently on website/readme

Meets

On https://www.lfedge.org/projects/openhorizon/

Open

On https://github.com/open-horizon

Open

No marketing website.

Development of a growth plan (to include both roadmap of projected feature sets as well as overall community growth/project maturity), to be done in conjunction with their project mentor(s) at the TAC.

Demonstrate that the current level of community participation is sufficient to meet the goals outlined in the growth plan.

Meets

Features are released iteratively as testable units are completed.
Releases happen every Thursday.

Completed work:

• Migrated Agent packages from GitHub to GHCR, Quay.io

  • GitHub

• Added first class support for OpenBao in Secrets Manager component

• Embedded FDO updated to most recent release

• MMS support for Kubernetes

• Secret support for Kubernetes clusters

• Node level secret support (device and cluster)

• Fixes, optimizations, upgrades, support

  • Cluster Agent auto-upgrade

  • All containers use UBI minimal base image. Evaluated micro but ultimately did not use it.

  • Support new Ubuntu, RHEL, and Fedora releases

  • Keep Agent in sync after offline for extended periods

  • Optimized workload restarting after service and policy updates

• Efficient event log pruning

Ongoing work:

• Realtime Workload Metrics

  • Since July 17, 2023

  • Participants: Anylog (EdgeLake project), Accuknox (KubeArmor project), NS1 (Pulsar), IBM (Edge Application Manager)

  • Deliverables: EdgeLake Service, Demo-in-a-Box w/EdgeLake, NS1 integration proof of technology, Federated Learning

• Workload Runtime Security

  • Participants: Accuknox (KubeArmor, ModelArmor), Mainsail (FTE), IBM (Edge Application Manager)

  • Deliverables: KubeArmor Service, ModelArmor investigation

• Model Management for Kubernetes

  • Atomic model placement and lifecycle management

  • Investigate integration with ModelArmor

  • Participants: Accuknox (ModelArmor project), IBM (Edge Application Manager)

  • Deliverables: MMS update for Kubernetes, ModelArmor proof of technology

• Software Infrastructure placement and lifecycle management

  • Provision network gateways (Skupper, Red Hat Service Interconnect, others TBD)

  • Provision data overlay (EdgeLake, Anylog)

  • Support Application Centric Connectivity

  • Support 5G Super Blueprint: Data Centric Connectivity (led by EdgeLake)

  • Participants: IBM (Hybrid Cloud Mesh), Anylog (EdgeLake project)

  • Deliverables: Application Centric Connectivity demo, 5GSBP blueprint proof of technology

• Demo-in-a-Box

  • Blessed Samples

  • Blessed Agent/Models

  • Initial HBOM, initial provisioning automation

  • EdgeLake use case

• Federated Learning use case

Future roadmap items:

• Tamper-proof features (through partnering): full encryption, wipe-on-demand, no cold data extraction

• RBAC/updated auth feature

• Workload lifecycle Event Hooks

• Management Hub disaster recovery features

• Helm 3 deployment support

• Edge Function placement and lifecycle management

• First class support for Ocre WASM OCI-compliant workloads

• Investigate integration with Agentic frameworks (ex: BeeAI, LangFlow)

• Complete RISC-V support and examples

Document that it is being used in POCs.

Meets

• Bachelor Controls: Sabetha, KS Smart City project. Completed initial technical enablement. Next will roll out to Linux host machines.

• Unnamed FSI: Completed use case POC.

• NS1: EdgeLake and Open Horizon working to deliver data to Pulsar product.

• IBM: Internal effort to embed in product for remote agent delivery, edge functions

Demonstrate a substantial ongoing flow of commits and merged contributions.

Meets

Demonstrate evidence of, or a plan for, interoperability, compatibility or extension to other LF Edge Projects. Examples may include demonstrating modularity (ability to swap in components between projects).

Meets

• Completed work: embedded FDO and OpenBao functionality, collaboration on ONE Summit demos

• Ongoing work: EdgeLake integration with Open Horizon, EdgeLake collaboration on Data Centric Connectivity (5G SBP), EdgeLake cooperation on Demo-in-a-Box, Open Horizon availability in LG Edge Sandbox

• Future roadmap item: Support for Ocre WASM workloads

Have a defined governing body of at least 5 or more members (owners and core maintainers).

Improving

Link to TSC page on wiki.  Current composition is:

• IBM - 5 (61%)

• AccuKnox - 1  (13%)

• Anylog - 1 (13%)

• mimik Technologies - 1 (13%)

Actively working to expand TSC voting membership outside of IBM.

Have a documented and publicly accessible description of the project's governance, decision-making, and release processes.

Explicitly define a project governance and committer process. This is preferably laid out in a GOVERNANCE.md file and references a CONTRIBUTING.md and OWNERS.md file showing the current and emeritus committers.

Meets

• Governance - high level description of goals

• Community - organizational structure, roles, process

• Contributions - feature requests & lifecycle process

• Release - feature releases & roadmap
  see Growth Plan above

Have a healthy number of committers from at least two organizations. A committer is defined as someone with the commit bit; i.e., someone who can accept contributions to some or all of the project.

Meets

See Insights links above.

NOTE: Current Insights organization report not accurate.

Open

Demonstrate evidence of interoperability, compatibility or extension to other LF Edge Projects. Examples may include demonstrating modularity (ability to swap in components between projects).

Meets

See interoperability section above.

We welcome other projects to work with us on joint efforts.

Adopt the Foundation Code of Conduct.

Meets

Have a public list of project adopters for at least the primary repo (e.g., ADOPTERS.md or logos on the project website).

Meets

Added Bachelor Controls, Unnamed FSI

Anylog/EdgeLake, AgriLife (Texas A&M), ZHAW/Nephele, Mainsail, IBM, DLR (Rhineland-Palatinate), AgriRegio Projekt, AccuKnox, mimik, Scale Computing, Intensivate, expeer

Intention for the upcoming year (Remain at current stage OR advance towards the next Stage)

We intend to advance to Stage Three when the project and our TAC Sponsors feel we're ready.  At this point, the largest sticking point is increasing non-IBM contributions.  Open Horizon should not be a single-source open-source project. Our goal is to submit a proposal for Stage Three before the end of 2025.

Include a link to your project’s LFX Insights page. We will be looking for signs of consistent or increasing contribution activity. Please feel free to add commentary to add color to the numbers and graphs we will see on Insights.

Insights Link

How many maintainers do you have, and which organizations are they from? (Feel free to link to an existing MAINTAINERS file if appropriate.)

We feature a MAINTAINERS file in each repo, ex: 

• KubeArmor-Integration - AccuKnox

• Documentation - IBM

• FDO Support - IBM

• Grafana and EdgeLake - Anylog

• Not including OpenBao, since it is exiting incubation.

What do you know about adoption, and how has this changed since your last review / since you joined the current Stage? If you can list companies that are end users of your project, please do so. (Feel free to link to an existing ADOPTERS file if appropriate.)

The most recent adoptions are:

• Bachelor Controls: City of Sabetha, KS

• Unnamed FSI

How has the project performed against its goals since the last review? (We won't penalize you if your goals changed for good reasons.)

Previous Goals:

• Grow ecosystem and Partners
  We’ve added new Feature Requests and are seeing traction with Demo-in-a-Box. No new Partners yet.

What are the current goals of the project? For example, are you working on major new features? Or are you concentrating on adoption or documentation?

See the Stage Two Growth Plan above.

Six new features, one R&D effort, and one new collaboration in our future roadmap.

How can LF Edge help you achieve your upcoming goals?

If we can begin collaborating with more universities, that would be productive.

Do you think that your project meets the criteria for the next Stage?

Not quite yet.  We need to diversify our TSC company representation by adding at least one more large company project Partner.

Please summarize Outreach Activities in which the Project has participated in (e.g. Participation in conferences, seminars, speaking engagements, meetups, etc.)

Events since last annual review:

• ONE Summit

• Edge Computing Expo

• LF Member Summit

• TechXchange

Book published since last review:

Are you leveraging the Technical Project Getting Started Checklist? If yes, please provide link (if publicly available).

No

Please review, and update if needed, your Project entry on the Existing Project Taxonomy page, modifying the Last Updated / Reviewed date in the header.

No changes needed.

Please share a LFX security report for your project in the last 30 days

SECURITY.md

LFX Security - includes LF Edge repos