Re: CNCF SIG "App Delivery"


Quinton Hoole <quinton.hoole@...>
 

To be clear, I totally agree that "trying to address every project in that space" is not a goal, and neither can it be for almost any of the CNCF SIGs (Storage, Security, Traffic/Networking clearly also suffer from a similar problem).  

However, like CNCF SIG Storage did, a white paper clarifying the landscape and terminology, and helping to prioritize which specific points in the space are most interesting and of highest priority is useful, and one of the primary purposes of CNCF SIGs.

 Q

From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Roger Klorese <roger.klorese@...>
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 11:39 AM
To: Doug Davis
Cc: Alexis Richardson; Jeff Brewer; cncf-toc@...; Michelle Noorali
Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF SIG "App Delivery"
 
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.