Re: Thoughts on KubeCon

Matt Farina

Liz, I appreciate you’re taking time here with more details.

I want to note a difference between malicious intent and people drawing conclusions of it. Those are different people in different situations. I, personally, don’t think you had any malicious intent. I can see how some might draw the conclusion, though. I can only imagine what intent people drew from my decisions in the past. That’s why I keep thinking with a forward eye.

> Matt, BTW you left out nuclio serverless platform

I said including because I’m sure I missed more than one serverless platform. There are oh so many of them right now.

> Again I go back to my point that a lot of people (and not just from one company)
> submitting on a topic suggests that at this moment in time it's of broad interest to the community. 

There different types of people with different goals. Lots of submissions means there’s are people, vendors in our case, who want to talk about something to users. But, does that mean it’s useful material for the end-users? Should end-users get to see the diversity?

I note the vendors here because Dan shared details on how few percent of end-users even submitted to the conference. On the whole the general sessions are vendors.

> One of the Knative talks is an end-user story from T-Mobile

I really want to see if “work in progress” software is being used by T-Mobile in production. I’m curious now :)

> Kubeless was mentioned in two abstracts, one of which is an accepted talk and the other really didn't get a great score. 

Can you point me to the session on this? Searching the schedule for kubeless turned up speaders with it in their bios but not in the sessions themselves. I’m curious to see what we have and what track that landed on.

> just for stats, for the ServerlessNYC event in 2 weeks (1 day we organized)
> we got about 50 submission, only 2 on Knative (one accepted)

What does this say about CloudNativeCon and it’s interaction with developers and the outside world (where the end-users are)? Are our submissions too much on our island of ideas and topics?

Let's say that JaneSchmoeNativeTool IS better than GNativeTool.
> Even if Jane Schmoe DOES get a talk at Kubecon, will it really make a
> difference to adoption under these circumstances?

This is a wonderful question. Consider the room of attendees going to this track. If they don’t hear about other options will they ever try them? Should that room full of attendees hear about a diverse set of solutions?

Back to this question, in practice presentations at conferences like this can have an impact. That’s part of the reason why there was a push for knative sessions here.

To circle back to something Dan said,

> The reality is than an organization like CNCF has many constituencies,
> including our members, the TOC, our project maintainers, our end users,
> developers considering using or contributing to our projects, and others.

knative is really an interesting case for this system. It’s not a CNCF project. Does that mean it’s not one of our projects when our is the CNCF? That means having so much of it isn’t in support of our project maintainers or of getting devs to consider using or contributing to our projects… right?

It’s work in progress rather than being released so it’s not ready for most end-users. There are alternative solutions that are 1.0 released and ready for production. So, how does knative benefit end-users this year at the con?

Yet, a group of vendors is pushing it to make it hot.

Just thinking out loud. knative is a really good test to think out loud on.

Matt Farina

Join to automatically receive all group messages.