Re: What's the point? (or,"What's the Emperor wearing?")
alexis richardson
The foundation exists to foster cloud native technology and adoption by end users The basis for this is that certain open source projects solve problems specific to cloud native, as defined by the cncf Being a neutral home for those projects and providing core services and help has to be the absolute baseline. All projects however nascent have the right to ask for that. Helping with adoption requires users and the cncf to have a conversation in which technologies are recommended, as are patterns and other best practices eg for interop, scale, what have you If you combine the above then you need: 1. a high bar for projects that are being recommended to customers. Incubation and graduation have a high bar. It could be higher 2. a low bar for new (sandbox) projects that are high risk but need a neutral venue and core services 3. commitment to prune failures out of the sandbox, in a timely manner 4. clarity around this model We continue to fail at 4. Marketing of projects is something everyone will debate. It is hard to separate user engagement from marketing - the activities are so similar. I recommend review of the Sandbox marketing language. If you feel the CNCF is handling this badly please speak out. Sandbox is a very limited blessing but the projects are entitled to be excited about joining the Sandbox. Today's discussion was about how we scale CNCF and the TOC. The WGs and Categories are possible ways to federate work. That all obviously need more thought and care. Even if we had no sandbox we would still have to resolve this issue.
On Wed, 19 Sep 2018, 00:02 Joseph Jacks, <j@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: What's the point? (or,"What's the Emperor wearing?")
Bryan Cantrill <bryan@...>
I agree with Jessie -- and for whatever it's worth, here were my reasons to be involved with the CNCF during its inception over three years ago: I expanded on that ~five months later: Three years later, that's still the appeal for me: serving our industry by serving the open source projects that represent the foundation for cloud-native infrastructure. I think we have had some successes in that regard -- but not without our share of stumbles. The conversation this morning was a promising start to a conversation that sorely needs to be had -- and is likely without easy answers. - Bryan
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Jessica Frazelle via Lists.Cncf.Io <me=jessfraz.com@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: What's the point? (or,"What's the Emperor wearing?")
Joseph Jacks <j@...>
I agree with Jessie!
On Sep 18, 2018, at 3:30 PM, Jessica Frazelle via Lists.Cncf.Io <me=jessfraz.com@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: What's the point? (or,"What's the Emperor wearing?")
Jessica Frazelle <me@...>
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 18:04 Nick Chase <nchase@...> wrote: First off, please take this in the sprit in which it's intended. It's In my opinion the foundations role should be a space for shared IP. And I agreed that people are putting too much importance on being in the foundation. You can do open source without a foundation. The foundations role should not be marketing projects and creating non-organic growth but helping the projects have a space to work without worrying about IP or licensing. It should also help the communities of those projects get things they need like money for CI infrastructure or other things and making sure those projects communities are healthy. thats what a foundation is in imho.
|
|||||
|
|||||
What's the point? (or,"What's the Emperor wearing?")
Nick Chase
First off, please take this in the sprit in which it's intended. It's not meant to be snarky or argumentative, (though it will probably sound that way), it's just meant to start a conversation.
I've been thinking a lot about the conversation about working groups from this morning's meeting, and I think we're missing a fundamental issue. What I heard was a lot of talk about how "we don't want to be kingmakers" and "people put more importance on being a CNCF project than they should". Well, if being a CNCF project doesn't mean anything ... why do it? In fact, why have a foundation at all? If the purpose of the CNCF is just to foster cloud native computing, and not to validate a project's existence, then why handle projects at all? Why not just create standards, or even just recommendations, as W3C did/does(?). I guess what I'm saying is that while nobody likes politics -- and believe me I DESPISE them -- if you're going to have a foundation that is supposed to mean something, then ... it should mean something. So my feeling is that we either bite the bullet and get tough about letting projects in -- even if that means asking them to perhaps work together, or create a joint API and then manage the API -- or we drop the pretenses and just create a directory anybody can add themselves to. See, I told you it would sound snarky, but really, I am only trying to start the discussion. Somebody please, tell me what I'm missing here. ---- Nick
|
|||||
|
|||||
Scaling TOC community while minimizing politics
Matt Farina
I really liked the honesty around politics, companies (both big and startup), and the ways extending the community can be gamed. It’s great to see reflection on keeping things on track. I had a few ideas to throw at the wall to see if they or a derivative stick. 1. For new projects, working groups, categories, and analysis of an area we could have a template containing the areas the TOC wants details on and an example of one being filled out. This will lead people who are doing the work in the direction the TOC wants. For example, with a new working group there appears to be a desire for concrete measurable goals that can be tested for done. A template with an example could illustrate and communicate that. 2. The “cloud native” landscape is exploding. Big companies, startups, and everyone in between in getting going on it. This space is prone to churn. What the CNCF brings in and oversees could be considered separate from an effort to document the entire landscape as it changes. It may be worth completely separating these efforts entirely and not trying to overlap them. For example, documenting a landscape could be a matter of coming up with criteria for inclusion and then keeping the landscape up to date for things that meet that. Then having a process to catch projects, products, and services that are no longer maintained and pruning them. Defining the category and pruning criteria is the hard part. Then, separate from the documentation effort, come up with a list of value propositions for both having a project in the CNCF and keeping it under control by some other entity. These can even serve as a checklist to see if a proposed project has it’s goals in the right place when they want to join. Do the CNCFs value props for a project help them in addition to being a cloud native project. These are just ideas to start a conversation.
|
|||||
|
|||||
CNCF TOC Meeting: 9/18/2018
Here's the agenda deck for tomorrow: We will be covering a backlog of community presentation decisions, reminder on SAFE WG voting and hearing from the netdata community. See you tomorrow! Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: linus
luke@...
wow, times change. +1
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 10:00 PM Richard Hartmann <richih@...> wrote: Thanks for sharing; unexpected, but positive.
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: linus
Richard Hartmann
Thanks for sharing; unexpected, but positive.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Richard
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 10:50 PM alexis richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|
|||||
linus
alexis richardson
|
|||||
|
|||||
Revised CNCF Interactive Landscape
Dan Kohn <dan@...>
We've released the biggest ever improvement to the CNCF Interactive Landscape: we now dynamically generate the landscape in real-time in your browser rather than having a graphic artist do so manually once a month. (Note that this landscape view works better from a desktop browser than a mobile one.) This also enables some intriguing new views, such as seeing just CNCF-hosted projects, just Apache-hosted ones, or just open source projects: As before, if you see individual items that should be updated, please open a pull request after reviewing the instructions on https://github.com/cncf/landscape. If you'd like to discuss future enhancements or changes, please join the reference architecture list: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-reference-architecture -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] SAFE (Security) Working Group
Sree Tummidi <stummidi@...>
+1 (non-binding)
Thanks, Sree Tummidi
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] Rook moving to incubation
Jonathan Boulle <jon@...>
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] SAFE (Security) Working Group
jainvipin@...
+1 non-binding
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 5:16 PM, 徐翔轩 <eleven.xu@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] SAFE (Security) Working Group
徐翔轩 <eleven.xu@...>
+1 non-binding
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks & Best Regards, 徐翔轩 ---------------------------------------------------- 上海得帆信息技术有限公司 SHANGHAI DEFINESYS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. E-mail : eleven.xu@... Mobile : +86-186-1626-0537 Website:http://www.definesys.com ----------------------------------------------------
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] Rook moving to incubation
Erin Boyd
+1 non-binding
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018, 1:06 PM Sam Lambert <samlambert@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] SAFE (Security) Working Group
Benjamin Hindman
+1
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 6:50 AM, Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
--
Benjamin Hindman Founder of Mesosphere and Co-Creator of Apache Mesos Follow us on Twitter: @mesosphere
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] Rook moving to incubation
Sam Lambert <samlambert@...>
+1 binding.
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 1:39 AM, Daniel Bryant <db@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] SAFE (Security) Working Group
Sam Lambert <samlambert@...>
+1 binding.
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 9:53 AM, Camille Fournier <skamille@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|
|||||
Re: [VOTE] Rook moving to incubation
+1 (non-binding) Great to see this for a very interesting project!
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 4:19 PM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
|
|||||
|