Re: CNCF SIG "App Delivery"


Roger Klorese <roger.klorese@...>
 

I believe they are by nature in scope - but also trying to address every project in those spaces is boiling the ocean. 

Roger B.A. Klorese
Senior Product Manager
SUSE
705 5th Ave SSuite 1000
Seattle WA 98104

(P)+1 206.217.7432
(M)+1 425.444.5493
roger.klorese@...
Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/RogerKlorese
GPG Key: D567 F186 A6AE D244 067E  95E4 E67D 019F 0670 D9CC


On Jun 4, 2019, at 11:38 AM, Doug Davis <dug@...> wrote:

Is there a doc that gives a more detailed explanation of what "App Delivery" is meant to cover?
I honestly do not know what it means for both PaaS and Serverless to be out of scope when I believe all of them are (probably) based on containers and therefore will leverage container images as part of "App Delivery".


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

<graycol.gif>Alexis Richardson ---06/04/2019 02:22:19 PM---Doug - no, I'm just saying that both PaaS and Serverless are out of scope for CNCF SIG App Delivery.

From: Alexis Richardson <alexis@...>
To: Doug Davis <dug@...>
Cc: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>, "Brewer, Jeff" <Jeff_Brewer@...>, Michelle Noorali <Michelle.Noorali@...>
Date: 06/04/2019 02:22 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF SIG "App Delivery"





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
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>




Join cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io to automatically receive all group messages.