I think the new picture is fine to show things at a very high level (e.g. IaaS at the bottom, PaaS and SaaS are higher up, etc.) but I think most of my conversations will very quickly get into something more like "where does project X fit into all of this?" - and that's where I think the current picture is more useful. With so many CN-related projects out there, a more detailed picture helps to explain how all of the various puzzle pieces (projects) come together into one cohesive story. It also helps to show where we expect people to mix-n-match things based on their needs and where the plug-points might be.
STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Architecture & Technology
(919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@...
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog
Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc ---07/21/2016 07:54:53 AM---Hi all, Yesterday we had our 2nd discussion about the 'marketecture' stack that Ken
From: Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...>
To: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>
Date: 07/21/2016 07:54 AM
Subject: [cncf-toc] audience for "reference architecture" content
Sent by: cncf-toc-bounces@...
Yesterday we had our 2nd discussion about the 'marketecture' stack that Ken and I put out. One piece of feedback, from Doug Davis by email, and then eg from Alan Conley on the call, was that much more detail could help.
I believe this is a "target audience" issue. We may need different material for different audiences even if those audiences are all "technical". For example - I argued that for developer end users, less detail is good.
It would be very helpful to hear from the people advocating for more detail, regarding their target audience.
cncf-toc mailing list