@nikosft, thoughts? Can we discuss a little more what you want to add here?

@SteveLasker, since you are touching up formatting: I am ok with this as a starting point (by @nikosft and I, thanks to him for his contributions so far). I am sure we can add to it over time incrementally. If you are ready to merge it, so am I. I marked it as ready last evening and hope to add more over time of course, but don't have anything in the immediate future here. 🚢 it when ready.

Is there anything we can do to unblock this pull request?

Is there anything we can do to unblock this pull request?

I am happy with it if you are, we should try to merge it in short order. I probably shouldn't be reviewing and merging a PR I worked on.

I am happy too :)

By "related efforts", shouldn't these be projects that are actively supporting SCITT?
The things that could be SCITT enabled are nearly endless, so I'm not sure what we get with listing projects we happen to be thinking of.
Tracking an issue for projects we're making PRs or working with to help become SCITT enabled would be great.

To my understanding, related efforts are things that have the same goal as SCITT but are not SCITT.

I think it is important to talk about how SCITT relates to other efforts and contextualize it. If not, we presume that information is elsewhere (I think it is not).

Is there something we can to adjust or scope the content in the PR to finalize the review, or should we just close this PR?

@SteveLasker, can we discuss at the tail end of next week's meeting how we intend to handle this?