Re: Incubation of OpenEBS in to CNCF?
Saad Ali <saadali@...>
I understand that any project can choose to apply or not apply to be part of the CNCF Sandbox.
And while I realize the intent may not be to attempt to promote one project above another, per the CNCF Sandbox Guidelines the purpose of the CNCF Sandbox is to 1) "Encourage public visibility", 2) "Facilitate alignment with existing projects", 3) "Nurture projects", and 4) "Remove possible legal and governance obstacles to adoption and contribution".
As far as I can tell, the only major requirement for joining the sandbox, is support of "2 TOC sponsors" (which is also a little concerning to me).
So for projects that do apply to be part of the CNCF Sandbox, which projects will TOC members choose to sponsor? Specifically, will TOC members continue to sponsor any new block/file storage system that applies to be part of the CNCF? If so, why? What benefit does bringing in more block/file storage systems in to the CNCF bring to users of the CNCF ecosystem? If not, what criteria will we use to discern which ones we accept and which ones we don't accept?
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:58 PM Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox@...> wrote:
Kubernetes had a very tight dependency on the container runtime. Like the Rook decision, it made sense at the time.
As Kubernetes becomes more extensible we have to be be more thoughtful and intentional about the value of the projects we bring in to the CNCF ecosystem for our users.
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:25 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton.hoole@...> wrote: