Re: CNCF SIG "App Delivery"
Doug, the only doc I'm aware of is the proposed SIGs:
But I think that description is not actually universally agreed upon yet, hence this discussion.
App Dev, Ops & Testing PaaS, Serverless, Operators, CI/CD, Conformance, Chaos Eng, Scalability and Reliability measurement etc.
At the risk of over-repeating myself, I think it's important that for any given technology-related question that a user comes to us with, we should only essentially have two answers:
Either:
1) That's not in scope of the CNCF. Please find an answer elsewhere.
or
2) Please speak to CNCF SIG X - they cover that area.
I do not think we should ever have to answer:
X) Yes, the CNCF considers that in scope, but we don't actually have a place for you to go and discuss that.
Q
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Doug Davis <dug@...>
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 11:36 AM
To: Alexis Richardson
Cc: cncf-toc@...; Brewer, Jeff; Michelle Noorali
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF SIG "App Delivery"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
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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>