How do you want feedback? email here or edit the form? scary that it appears i can edit :-) thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Hybrid Cloud | OM Knative (9

TOC Members, With CloudEvents reaching the v1.0 milestone, the Serverless WG has been looking at what additional pain points might the community be running into. After several meetings the WG produced

Quinton - Thanks for mentioning SIG-Runtime - I forgot about this suggestion. Do you think CloudEvents would be under SIG-Runtime? It mentioning orchestration and batch seems like it might fit under t

TOC members, On a previous TOC call there was a request for feedback from the Serverless WG as to whether or not it would be a good fit for inclusion in the new AppDelivery SIG. During last week's WG

+1 non-binding thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Hybrid Cloud | OM Knative (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@... The more I'm around some people,

+1 NB thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Hybrid Cloud | OM Knative (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@... The more I'm around some people, the more

+1 nb thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Hybrid Cloud | OM Knative (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@... The more I'm around some people, the more

> I'd like app delivery to be narrow if possible, but that feels hard already! From my POV I'm not disagreeing, I just don't have a good sense of what this "narrow scope" includes, so it's hard to kno

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

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

Yup. I kind of like what we did in the Serverless WG. We produced a whitepaper and landscape doc to help people understand what serverless is all about, what's going on in the community, what's out th

Aside from the typo [1], +1 non-binding [1] https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/194/files#r255297017 thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Arc

+1 non-binding thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Architecture & Technology (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@... The more I'm

+1 non-binding thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Architecture & Technology (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@... The more I'm

+1 nb thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Architecture & Technology (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@... The more I'm around so

+1 NB -Doug cncf-toc@... wrote on 11/07/2018 01:06:21 AM: > From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk > <caniszczyk@...> > Date: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 a

Not sure I can make the next meeting, but my thoughts on some of these: > Should only CNCF projects (direct CNCF projects and Kubernetes SIGs/ > sub-projects) have intros and deep dives on the maintai

"Quinton Hoole" <quinton.hoole@...> wrote: > I also think that it would be super-useful for submission rejection > notices to be accompanied by a few brief reviewer notes (e.g. “too > much mark

+1 non-binding thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Architecture & Technology (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@... The more I'm

+1 non-binding thanks -Doug _______________________________________________________ STSM | IBM Open Source, Cloud Architecture & Technology (919) 254-6905 | IBM 444-6905 | dug@... The more I'm