Re: CNCF SIG "App Delivery"
Doug Davis <dug@...>
Is there a doc that gives a more detailed explanation of what "App Delivery" is meant to cover? Doug - no, I'm just saying that both PaaS and Serverless are out of scope for CNCF SIG App Delivery. On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 6:08 PM Doug Davis <dug@...> wrote: > > Alexis - since you mentioned that PaaS and serverless isn't in scope, in your opinion, does this mean that you see defining how to deliver a "serverless app" as something distinct from a "PaaS app" or a "K8s app" ? I've been starting to merge these world a lot recently. > > thanks > -Doug > _______________________________________________________ > 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" ---06/04/2019 12:15:03 PM---Yep, they are. On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:14 PM Brewer, Jeff <Jeff_Brewer@...> wrote: > > From: "alexis richardson" <alexis@...> > To: "Brewer, Jeff" <Jeff_Brewer@...> > Cc: Michelle Noorali <Michelle.Noorali@...>, "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...> > Date: 06/04/2019 12:15 PM > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF SIG "App Delivery" > Sent by: cncf-toc@... > > ________________________________ > > > > Yep, they are. > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:14 PM Brewer, Jeff <Jeff_Brewer@...> wrote: > > > > As long as app templates are part of the SIG, then it should be fine. Just need to be explicit with the charter (the name at least caused me a little confusion). I agree don't go too broad either. > > > > Jeff > > > > On 6/4/19, 9:11 AM, "Alexis Richardson" <alexis@...> wrote: > > > > This email is from an external sender. > > > > > > Jeff > > > > I think the intent is already pretty broad, including app templates > > and so on (eg Helm), plus various pieces of the CD pipe, plus > > supporting dev tools. > > > > IMO stuff like PaaS & serverless is out of scope. > > > > Does this make sense? > > > > a > > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:07 PM Brewer, Jeff <Jeff_Brewer@...> wrote: > > > > > > Would it make sense to have a more general app sig? I'd be curious what other CNCF TOC members think. I know in general Kubernetes has tried to stay unopinionated "up the stack" but it seems unless we define an "application" in a more formal way, having App Delivery as a SIG is premature. Am I making sense? > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > On 6/4/19, 9:04 AM, "cncf-toc@... on behalf of alexis richardson" <cncf-toc@... on behalf of alexis@...> wrote: > > > > > > This email is from an external sender. > > > > > > > > > Michelle and I are pulling together a SIG for App Delivery. > > > > > > Our next step: draft a charter. We'd love a few keen would-be > > > SIGonauts to join our chartering efforts, please! Also, we shall > > > figure out a plan to solicit leaders for the group. > > > > > > Interested? Email us offline. > > > > > > Alexis+Michelle > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > |
|