|
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of the document it became
clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
- Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
- Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
- Supporting projects with Operators
- Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work
😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
I'd like to contribute. Looking forward to it.
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of the document it became
clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
- Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
- Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
- Supporting projects with Operators
- Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work
😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
-- Michael Hrivnak Principal Software Engineer, RHCE Red Hat
|
|
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 11:13 AM Michael Hrivnak < mhrivnak@...> wrote: I'd like to contribute. Looking forward to it.
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of the document it became
clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
- Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
- Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
- Supporting projects with Operators
- Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work
😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
--
Michael Hrivnak Principal Software Engineer, RHCE Red Hat
|
|
|
+1 from me.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Fri, 2020-02-21 at 16:00 +0000, Reitbauer, Alois wrote: Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on
Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator
definition. During the creation of the document it became clear that
there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with
operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project
using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to
be covered:
Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
Supporting projects with Operators
Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work
😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply t
o this thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee
only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you
are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy
or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error
please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria
GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz
whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger
Turm 20
|
|
|
I have a few questions, if you don't mind. I'm trying to place where this fits with the things...
- Is this meant to be a formal working group under the CNCF? As in https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/master/workinggroups
- Is there a definition of done for the working group? Or a task to figure that out. Something like "Coordination work among different operator framework" could go on forever.
- Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
Thanks,
Matt
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 11:00 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of the document it became
clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
- Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
- Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
- Supporting projects with Operators
- Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work 😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
Count me in!
We have been doing work in this space as part of delivering purpose-built multi-Operator stacks to our customers. As part of this we have defined a Operator Maturity Model with associated guidelines:
Will be happy to share these learnings with the community.
-Devdatta
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: cncf-sig-app-delivery@... <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of Reitbauer, Alois via Lists.Cncf.Io <alois.reitbauer=dynatrace.com@...>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 10:00 AM
To: cncf-sig-app-delivery@... <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Cc: cncf-sig-app-delivery@... <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of the document it became
clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
- Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
- Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
- Supporting projects with Operators
- Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work
😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
We're definitely interested in joining as well.
Grant
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:57 AM, Devdatta Kulkarni <devdatta@...> wrote:
|
|
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:35 PM Grant Miller < grant@...> wrote: We're definitely interested in joining as well.
Grant On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:57 AM, Devdatta Kulkarni <devdatta@...> wrote:
|
|
|
See comments below:
// Alois
From: <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of "Matt Farina via Lists.Cncf.Io" <matt=mattfarina.com@...>
Reply to: "matt@..." <matt@...>
Date: Friday, 21. February 2020 at 18:11
To: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Cc: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group
I have a few questions, if you don't mind. I'm trying to place where this fits with the things...
-
Is this meant to be a formal working group under the CNCF? As in
https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/master/workinggroups
[Alois] – Yes, just as we do for air gapped environemnts
-
Is there a definition of done for the working group? Or a task to figure that out. Something like "Coordination work among different operator framework" could go on forever.
[Alois] First step is to see whether we have enough interested people. Next steps is to define the detailed agenda. I just threw in some high level discussion
points to get the converstion started.
-
Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 11:00 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of
the document it became clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
-
Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
-
Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
-
Supporting projects with Operators
-
Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work
😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this
thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone
else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
See comments below:
// Alois
I have a few questions, if you don't mind. I'm trying to place where this fits with the things...
-
Is this meant to be a formal working group under the CNCF? As in
https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/master/workinggroups
[Alois] – Yes, just as we do for air gapped environemnts
-
Is there a definition of done for the working group? Or a task to figure that out. Something like "Coordination work among different operator framework" could go on forever.
[Alois] First step is to see whether we have enough interested people. Next steps is to define the detailed agenda. I just threw in some high level discussion
points to get the converstion started.
-
Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 11:00 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of
the document it became clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
-
Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
-
Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
-
Supporting projects with Operators
-
Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work
😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this
thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone
else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
Alois,
You made a comment that may be getting to my point of confusion...
3. Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
This raises two questions for me...
- The SIGs derive their scope from the TOC who gets it from the charter. What output could come from the "valid" operator discussion that would be used within the scope of the TOC as it relates to the projects. The TOC doesn't sit as management to project maintainers telling them what to do or build.
- If it comes to being listed in the operator hub isn't that an interface that the owner of the operator hub declares and works with other projects on? Isn't it the owner of the operator hub to decide on the scope for what they list?
I ask these questions because it comes down to a matter of who owns what scope. This is why I wanted the project level scope worked out ahead of time.
Does that help to explain why I'm asking the questions.
- Matt
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 11:27 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
See comments below:
// Alois
From: <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of "Matt Farina via Lists.Cncf.Io" <matt=mattfarina.com@...>
Reply to: "matt@..." <matt@...>
Date: Friday, 21. February 2020 at 18:11
To: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Cc: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group I have a few questions, if you don't mind. I'm trying to place where this fits with the things...
- Is this meant to be a formal working group under the CNCF? As in https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/master/workinggroups
[Alois] – Yes, just as we do for air gapped environemnts
- Is there a definition of done for the working group? Or a task to figure that out. Something like "Coordination work among different operator framework" could go on forever.
[Alois] First step is to see whether we have enough interested people. Next steps is to define the detailed agenda. I just threw in some high level discussion
points to get the converstion started.
- Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 11:00 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of
the document it became clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
- Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
- Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
- Supporting projects with Operators
- Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work 😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this
thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone
else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
I'm also interesting in joining
See comments below:
// Alois
I have a few questions, if you don't mind. I'm trying to place where this fits with the things...
-
Is this meant to be a formal working group under the CNCF? As in
https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/master/workinggroups
[Alois] – Yes, just as we do for air gapped environemnts
-
Is there a definition of done for the working group? Or a task to figure that out. Something like "Coordination work among different operator framework" could go on forever.
[Alois] First step is to see whether we have enough interested people. Next steps is to define the detailed agenda. I just threw in some high level discussion
points to get the converstion started.
-
Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 11:00 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of
the document it became clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
-
Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
-
Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
-
Supporting projects with Operators
-
Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work
😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this
thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone
else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
Chris Hein
+1 I'm interested and willing to contribute.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 11:57 AM Matt Farina < matt@...> wrote: Alois,
You made a comment that may be getting to my point of confusion...
3. Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
This raises two questions for me...
- The SIGs derive their scope from the TOC who gets it from the charter. What output could come from the "valid" operator discussion that would be used within the scope of the TOC as it relates to the projects. The TOC doesn't sit as management to project maintainers telling them what to do or build.
- If it comes to being listed in the operator hub isn't that an interface that the owner of the operator hub declares and works with other projects on? Isn't it the owner of the operator hub to decide on the scope for what they list?
I ask these questions because it comes down to a matter of who owns what scope. This is why I wanted the project level scope worked out ahead of time.
Does that help to explain why I'm asking the questions.
- Matt
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 11:27 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
See comments below:
// Alois
I have a few questions, if you don't mind. I'm trying to place where this fits with the things...
- Is this meant to be a formal working group under the CNCF? As in https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/master/workinggroups
[Alois] – Yes, just as we do for air gapped environemnts
- Is there a definition of done for the working group? Or a task to figure that out. Something like "Coordination work among different operator framework" could go on forever.
[Alois] First step is to see whether we have enough interested people. Next steps is to define the detailed agenda. I just threw in some high level discussion
points to get the converstion started.
- Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 11:00 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of
the document it became clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
- Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
- Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
- Supporting projects with Operators
- Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work 😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this
thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone
else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
Matt Baldwin <baldwin@...>
I'm very interested in participating in this sig. Looking forward to it.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 12:23 PM Chris Hein < me@...> wrote: I'm interested in contributing & participating in this!
|
|
|
It would be hugely helpful to have a community-agreed definition of what an Operator is, so I'm all in favour of this initiative. -- Liz Rice - sent from my phone
On 24 Feb 2020, at 11:57, Matt Farina <matt@...> wrote:
Alois,
You made a comment that may be getting to my point of confusion...
3. Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
This raises two questions for me...
- The SIGs derive their scope from the TOC who gets it from the charter. What output could come from the "valid" operator discussion that would be used within the scope of the TOC as it relates to the projects. The TOC doesn't sit as management to project maintainers telling them what to do or build.
- If it comes to being listed in the operator hub isn't that an interface that the owner of the operator hub declares and works with other projects on? Isn't it the owner of the operator hub to decide on the scope for what they list?
I ask these questions because it comes down to a matter of who owns what scope. This is why I wanted the project level scope worked out ahead of time.
Does that help to explain why I'm asking the questions.
- Matt
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 11:27 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
See comments below:
// Alois
From: <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of "Matt Farina via Lists.Cncf.Io" <matt=mattfarina.com@...>
Reply to: "matt@..." <matt@...>
Date: Friday, 21. February 2020 at 18:11
To: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Cc: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group I have a few questions, if you don't mind. I'm trying to place where this fits with the things...
- Is this meant to be a formal working group under the CNCF? As in https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/master/workinggroups
[Alois] – Yes, just as we do for air gapped environemnts
- Is there a definition of done for the working group? Or a task to figure that out. Something like "Coordination work among different operator framework" could go on forever.
[Alois] First step is to see whether we have enough interested people. Next steps is to define the detailed agenda. I just threw in some high level discussion
points to get the converstion started.
- Why do we need a minimum requirements for a "valid" operator? Has a problem surfaced that needs this for solving?
[Alois] This relates to comments from your side regarding requirements to be listed in e.g. operator hub for non OLM operators.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 11:00 AM, Reitbauer, Alois wrote:
Hello everybody,
As discussed a while back we are also planning a working group on Operators. This is the next step after starting the work on operator definition. During the creation of
the document it became clear that there is more work to be done than simply a definition. Also with operator related projects joining the CNCF and more and more project using operators to deploy and manage on Kubernetes there is a lot to be covered:
- Best practices how to write operators e.g. CRDs, APIs, ….
- Minimum requirements for a “valid” operator
- Supporting projects with Operators
- Coordination work among different operator framework.
As this is a working group, we will need people to do the actual work 😊. If you are willing to actively contribute, please simply reply to this
thread.
// Alois
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone
else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
I created a Google Doc to detail out what we want to work on. Please add yourself and also comment regarding goal and non-goals.
// Alois
[1]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DqHnj8O9DoU1ev9RvEdpStFUQvH-Iz6OYako6bQn9rM/edit?usp=sharing
From: <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of "Matt Baldwin via Lists.Cncf.Io" <baldwin=stackpointcloud.com@...>
Reply to: "baldwin@..." <baldwin@...>
Date: Tuesday, 25. February 2020 at 03:07
To: Chris Hein <me@...>
Cc: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group
I'm very interested in participating in this sig. Looking forward to it.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 12:23 PM Chris Hein < me@...> wrote:
I'm interested in contributing & participating in this!
--
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
I am interested in joining. Looking forward to following standards set by the group.
|
|
|
Please count me in.
From: <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of "prudraraju via Lists.Cncf.Io" <prudraraju=salesforce.com@...>
Reply-To: "prudraraju@..." <prudraraju@...>
Date: Friday, February 28, 2020 at 9:50 PM
To: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Cc: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group
External Email: Use caution with links and attachments
I am interested in joining. Looking forward to following standards set by the group.
This message may contain information
that is confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
please advise the sender immediately and delete this message. See http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/compliance/email-disclaimers
for further information. Please refer to http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/compliance/privacy-policy for
more information about BlackRock’s Privacy
Policy.
For a list of BlackRock's office
addresses worldwide, see http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/about-us/contacts-locations.
©
2020 BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
Great to see so much interest in this work.
You can find the latest draft of the charter here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DqHnj8O9DoU1ev9RvEdpStFUQvH-Iz6OYako6bQn9rM/edit#
I also added a section at the end where everyone can share what they want to get out the working group.
// Alois
From: <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of "Bowen, Mike via Lists.Cncf.Io" <mike.bowen=blackrock.com@...>
Reply to: "mike.bowen@..." <mike.bowen@...>
Date: Saturday, 29. February 2020 at 19:08
To: "prudraraju@..." <prudraraju@...>, "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Cc: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group
Please count me in.
From: <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of "prudraraju via Lists.Cncf.Io" <prudraraju=salesforce.com@...>
Reply-To: "prudraraju@..." <prudraraju@...>
Date: Friday, February 28, 2020 at 9:50 PM
To: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Cc: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group
External Email: Use caution with links and attachments
I am interested in joining. Looking forward to following standards set by the group.
This message may contain information that is confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately and delete this
message. See
http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/compliance/email-disclaimers for further information. Please refer to
http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/compliance/privacy-policy for more information about BlackRock’s Privacy Policy.
For a list of BlackRock's office addresses worldwide, see
http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/about-us/contacts-locations.
©
2020 BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved.
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
+1
Count me in
~
Peter
Från: cncf-sig-app-delivery@... <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> för Bowen, Mike <mike.bowen@...>
Skickat: den 29 februari 2020 18:55
Till: prudraraju@... <prudraraju@...>; cncf-sig-app-delivery@... <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Ämne: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group
Please count me in.
From:
<cncf-sig-app-delivery@...> on behalf of "prudraraju via Lists.Cncf.Io" <prudraraju=salesforce.com@...>
Reply-To: "prudraraju@..." <prudraraju@...>
Date: Friday, February 28, 2020 at 9:50 PM
To: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Cc: "cncf-sig-app-delivery@..." <cncf-sig-app-delivery@...>
Subject: Re: [cncf-sig-app-delivery] Starting work on Operator Working Group
External Email: Use caution with links and attachments
I am interested in joining. Looking forward to following standards set by the group.
This message may contain information that is confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately
and delete this message. See
http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/compliance/email-disclaimers for further information. Please refer to
http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/compliance/privacy-policy for more information about BlackRock’s Privacy Policy.
For a list of BlackRock's office addresses worldwide, see
http://www.blackrock.com/corporate/about-us/contacts-locations.
©
2020 BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
