|
Re: Vitess follow up
Sugu
Thank-you. Those are good reasons! Are there specific places where
you'd like help winning or keeping more contributors?
Look forward to your view on systems & tradeoffs. Can I humbly
Sugu
Thank-you. Those are good reasons! Are there specific places where
you'd like help winning or keeping more contributors?
Look forward to your view on systems & tradeoffs. Can I humbly
|
By
alexis richardson
·
#841
·
|
|
Re: Vitess follow up
Hi Chris, Alexis,
For the license, we already intend to change it to ALv2: https://github.com/youtube/vitess/issues/2694.
For the comparison of various systems and trade-offs, we'll try to put
Hi Chris, Alexis,
For the license, we already intend to change it to ALv2: https://github.com/youtube/vitess/issues/2694.
For the comparison of various systems and trade-offs, we'll try to put
|
By
Sugu Sougoumarane
·
#840
·
|
|
Re: Vitess follow up
Also in terms of process, I believe Brian Grant on today's call has expressed interest in sponsoring the project from the TOC. I'd suggest at a following or next TOC meeting to decide whether the TOC
Also in terms of process, I believe Brian Grant on today's call has expressed interest in sponsoring the project from the TOC. I'd suggest at a following or next TOC meeting to decide whether the TOC
|
By
Chris Aniszczyk
·
#839
·
|
|
Vitess follow up
Sugu
Thank you again for your pres today.
What would *help Vitess the most* from a project advancement & end user POV? How can CNCF help?
a
Sugu
Thank you again for your pres today.
What would *help Vitess the most* from a project advancement & end user POV? How can CNCF help?
a
|
By
alexis richardson
·
#838
·
|
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
mmm I need to double check into the thread. Let's keep this out. I will confirm next meeting :)
2017-04-19 16:55 GMT+02:00 Alexis Richardson <alexis@...>:
--
Gianluca Arbezzano
www.gianarb.it
mmm I need to double check into the thread. Let's keep this out. I will confirm next meeting :)
2017-04-19 16:55 GMT+02:00 Alexis Richardson <alexis@...>:
--
Gianluca Arbezzano
www.gianarb.it
|
By
Gianluca Arbezzano <gianarb92@...>
·
#837
·
|
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
Gianluca, has Camille reviewed this?
Gianluca, has Camille reviewed this?
|
By
alexis richardson
·
#836
·
|
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
I am happy to share something about this proposal:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/16sCYq5EcB9_NFmnjtQ6WYmQ6tmt6CxYzsDL2ibrqPK8/edit#heading=h.lecnlkp0qpeq
I shared it via wg-ci some week ago, in
I am happy to share something about this proposal:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/16sCYq5EcB9_NFmnjtQ6WYmQ6tmt6CxYzsDL2ibrqPK8/edit#heading=h.lecnlkp0qpeq
I shared it via wg-ci some week ago, in
|
By
Gianluca Arbezzano <gianarb92@...>
·
#835
·
|
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
With my apologies for the late notice, I'm unable to make the call this morning due to a meeting that I can't move; talk to you in two weeks.
- Bryan
With my apologies for the late notice, I'm unable to make the call this morning due to a meeting that I can't move; talk to you in two weeks.
- Bryan
|
By
Bryan Cantrill <bryan@...>
·
#834
·
|
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
The doc hasn't really been touched in a while so we might have all the reviews/comments we're going to get. I did a little bit of clean-up around the "What should a CNCF WG do in this space?" section
The doc hasn't really been touched in a while so we might have all the reviews/comments we're going to get. I did a little bit of clean-up around the "What should a CNCF WG do in this space?" section
|
By
Doug Davis <dug@...>
·
#833
·
|
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
thanks Mark! can you be sure to remind me & chris to get this discussed in the next TOC in 2-3 weeks?
feel free to add reminder to today's TOC deck
thanks Mark! can you be sure to remind me & chris to get this discussed in the next TOC in 2-3 weeks?
feel free to add reminder to today's TOC deck
|
By
alexis richardson
·
#832
·
|
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
Given dockercon might take away availability and attention I’d be fine with moving further serverless discussion out to the next meeting. Perhaps a reminder to review/comment on the notes
Given dockercon might take away availability and attention I’d be fine with moving further serverless discussion out to the next meeting. Perhaps a reminder to review/comment on the notes
|
By
Mark Peek
·
#831
·
|
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
thanks Chris
** urgent ** if anyone has any adds for today please shout out.
eg: do we want to have a recap on next steps for Serverless
discussion, or wait till after
thanks Chris
** urgent ** if anyone has any adds for today please shout out.
eg: do we want to have a recap on next steps for Serverless
discussion, or wait till after
|
By
alexis richardson
·
#830
·
|
|
Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
Here's the draft agenda deck for tomorrow: https://goo.gl/1PJscF
The main topics are:
- Networking WG Update / Recommendations
- Community presentation from Vitess
Here's the draft agenda deck for tomorrow: https://goo.gl/1PJscF
The main topics are:
- Networking WG Update / Recommendations
- Community presentation from Vitess
|
By
Chris Aniszczyk
·
#829
·
|
|
Kubernetes Panel and Reception in Austin, a CNCF Sponsored Event, 6 PM Mon 4/17
Hello,
Please join the CNCF, CoreOS and Google Cloud Platform for a panel and reception where you can mingle and hear from some of the experts in the Kubernetes community. It will be held at 6 PM on
Hello,
Please join the CNCF, CoreOS and Google Cloud Platform for a panel and reception where you can mingle and hear from some of the experts in the Kubernetes community. It will be held at 6 PM on
|
By
Katie Schultz <kschultz@...>
·
#828
·
|
|
CNCF K8s Conformance WG Meeting Monday, 4/17 3:30 PM at DockerCon Austin
CNCF is forming a working group to discuss Kubernetes Software Conformance and the potential for an associated branding program for conformant implementations. If your company provides software based
CNCF is forming a working group to discuss Kubernetes Software Conformance and the potential for an associated branding program for conformant implementations. If your company provides software based
|
By
Dan Kohn <dan@...>
·
#827
·
|
|
Re: The Cloud-Nativity of Serverless
Hello all,
Sorry to join the discussion so late. I've added comments to the document, but I also wanted to present some thoughts more directly.
I work at iRobot, and we transitioned our fleet of
Hello all,
Sorry to join the discussion so late. I've added comments to the document, but I also wanted to present some thoughts more directly.
I work at iRobot, and we transitioned our fleet of
|
By
Kehoe, Ben <bkehoe@...>
·
#826
·
|
|
Re: The Cloud-Nativity of Serverless
I also added more content to the doc. I agree with Yaron and Doug on discussing and collaborating at an early stage to avoid the pain of having to build a converged standard later.
Especially for
I also added more content to the doc. I agree with Yaron and Doug on discussing and collaborating at an early stage to avoid the pain of having to build a converged standard later.
Especially for
|
By
Cathy Zhang <Cathy.H.Zhang@...>
·
#825
·
|
|
Re: The Cloud-Nativity of Serverless
Yario - exactly. Even if its too soon for standards, just having some of the key players in the same (virtual) room discussing high level topics (like terminology and usecases) might lead to the
Yario - exactly. Even if its too soon for standards, just having some of the key players in the same (virtual) room discussing high level topics (like terminology and usecases) might lead to the
|
By
Doug Davis <dug@...>
·
#824
·
|
|
Re: The Cloud-Nativity of Serverless
Mark/Doug,
I added my comments and more content to the doc
No room for “standards” yet, but I think it’s better to discuss when things are in an early stage rather than after people made
Mark/Doug,
I added my comments and more content to the doc
No room for “standards” yet, but I think it’s better to discuss when things are in an early stage rather than after people made
|
By
Yaron Haviv
·
#823
·
|
|
Re: The Cloud-Nativity of Serverless
For continuity on this thread, here are some quick notes from discussion in the TOC meeting today:
- Seeing more developers embrace serverless
- Most (if not all) people on the call
For continuity on this thread, here are some quick notes from discussion in the TOC meeting today:
- Seeing more developers embrace serverless
- Most (if not all) people on the call
|
By
Mark Peek
·
#822
·
|