Steering Council meeting, 1 Jun 2026 (with Fellows)

Members

Emma: Draft blog post on 6.x Features: Rob is the only one who answered positively
- Paste - plan publish - communicate with other authors on slack - Emma
- Share on #marketing channel in Slack
Sovereign Tech Fund
- Emma: Get one or more project(s) ready (maybe Admin or at least list of places to start)
- Plan another meeting with Lexi once the above is done
Tim: Technical Governance document
Tim: Teams Charters
- Security - Transitioning last open items to team discussions
- Translations Team - Need to reach out to Claude
Tim: Follow up on Oracle thread

Tim: Need to revisit tech governance forum thread
Security charter
- Sarah Boyce merged several changes
- We want to wrap this up and merge it
- Jacob to follow up with Sarah to transition last open items
- Frank is still pending joining the security list

Early draft
Jacob has solicited feedback from ORM contributors and helped Pravin to create a draft
Pravin should be creating a public DEP PR soon

Use case: acreate() delegating to asave(), see ticket
Maybe a DEP?
To solve Model.objects.acreate(), we need to support async model instantiation, which likely means we need an aset
- https://github.com/django/django/pull/20602#pullrequestreview-4391796527
Jacob wants to know if this is a good idea and/or next steps
Emma: This may be a place we could use Raphael’s async/sync generation code
- https://github.com/django/deps/pull/99

Forum
Oracle hosted way of running CI against the oracle database
We would need to opt into this by directing a CI action against this
Emma: Is this related to the Oracle partnership inquiry?
- Frank: Will follow up on this
Natalia: Can someone ask what the next steps are, what are they looking for from us?
- They have implemented a github action that we could review
- We want a PR that runs the tests against their DBs
- Could use the magic Jenkins comment, or have a GitHub actions test workflow
- Tim: Send a message to open a PR / ticket to create to proceed this forward.
Emma: Is this something that we’ll be able to rely on? What level of support would it offer?
- We could use this as a supplemental approach
Requirements are listed as:
- Review technical eligibility by analyzing the current GitHub Actions workflow(s)
- Proceed with Oracle Test Pilot onboarding by providing required OCI resources
- Tim to reach out to get a sense of poster availability to make a PR

When working on show_urls command, https://github.com/django/django/pull/21307
We are doing more merging of 3rd party libraries into main / advocating that this is the path forward for features
We have other licenses hanging out in the source code
Emma: When merging 3rd party library features, we could ask maintainers opinion
- If the maintainer is involved it’s easier to do
- If the maintainer isn’t it’s trickier
Frank: When merging 3rd party packages in, we could ask them to BSD3 it, so it’s easier for us to merge in
On code organization
- Could have a license file that directs to the various areas
- Could have a license at the top of each file or related to it
Seems agreement on social direction of asking maintainers to switch to BSD3 and/or formally agree to switch licenses. / Highlight that this is going to be a problem
- Would need changes to new features repo README / process
- Follow up with Adam’s cookiecutter and Django Commons best practices
We should credit the authors/maintainers in docs

It was a good time
Django and the DSF was mentioned in several talks
The security of GitHub Actions was referenced
We had several contributors to Django at sprints, mostly first-time contributors