Re: Sandbox Projects included from September 8 TOC meeting

Li, Xiang

(I am familiar with the team behind the project, and the background of the project).

OpenKurise itself is not an experiment. It supports some of the largest Kubernetes clusters in production environment at Alibaba and a few other large internet companies (

For any sizable companies using Kubeternetes, it is not uncommon to have tens of generic controllers that are not specific to any particular application. 

The motivation of OpenKruise project is to find a subset of these controllers that are commonly useful to a number of users rather than just one company. So we can reduce some duplication, improve collaboration and help the community to grow.

Yes, if some enhancements or workload types are popular enough that everyone wants then, we hope them to be upstreamed to Kubernetes project itself.

From:Liz Rice <liz@...>
Sent At:2020 Sep. 9 (Wed.) 10:39
To:Matt Farina <matt@...>
Cc:CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject:Re: [cncf-toc] Sandbox Projects included from September 8 TOC meeting

OpenKruise is experimenting with a number of workload-related resource definitions, some of which are enhancements to existing core K8s resources. We're happy to see these experiments and want to support them, but we wondered if it makes more sense for them to belong within the purview of the Kubernetes project rather than as a standalone project? My understanding is that OpenKruise intends to eventually contribute successful experiments to upstream Kubernetes anyway. 

There's also a question about project scope. If the Kubernetes project would actually prefer these experiments to take place in a separate project, does that make OpenKruise the natural home for all workload-related CRD ideas, or some other scope? 

The discussion was recorded (I'm sure Amy can provide the link if she hasn't already circulated it) and that might be worth listening to for more context, if you have the time.   

On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 4:21 PM Matt Farina <matt@...> wrote:
OpenKruise has reached out to Kubernetes SIG Apps and we will discuss the project.

For context, why would the TOC suggest OpenKruise fall under k8s instead of being it's own CNCF sandbox project?

On Tue, Sep 8, 2020, at 4:05 PM, Amye Scavarda Perrin wrote:
The TOC has reviewed the current Sandbox projects applying for inclusion. 

The projects included are: 
Open Service Mesh 

Other projects not brought to vote: 
checkov - further conversation needed re: roadmap, holding for updated roadmap
protop - no roadmap! Should this be a subproject of gRPC? TOC would like feedback from the gRPC project. 
Dataset Lifecycle Framework - next steps: TOC conversation with SIG Storage, Kubernetes COSI KEP
OpenKruise - discussion with Kubernetes Steering Committee needed, SIG Apps - should this be a subproject?
Predator - no clear roadmap, resubmit with clearer roadmap
SchemaHero - no clear roadmap, resubmit with clearer roadmap
Keylime - scheduled for next closed meeting, September 22

As part of this process, we've now added a new question to the sandbox proposal form: "Why do you want to contribute your project to the CNCF? What would you like to get out of being part of the CNCF?" 

Welcome to these new sandbox projects! 
Amye Scavarda Perrin | Program Manager | amye@...

Join { to automatically receive all group messages.