cncf-toc@lists.cncf.io | survey

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups

Date Date 1 - 8 of 8

survey

Erin Boyd #2145 Hi, Can someone explain the process by which the survey sent in June [https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/cncf-survey-june-2018] is composed? Thanks, Erin
More All Messages By This Member
Dan Kohn <dan@...> #2146 CNCF staff put it together. We try not to change it too much from survey to survey to make the results comparable, although there is a fundamental lack of statistical meaningfulness to the whole exercise. If you'd like to see changes in the next version, please let me know. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:03 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi, Can someone explain the process by which the survey sent in June [https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/cncf-survey-june-2018] is composed? Thanks, Erin
More All Messages By This Member
Erin Boyd #2147 Hi Dan, Thanks for your quick reply. I am a little concerned by OpenShift being completely omitted from the survey all together. I would of course like to see it in the next survey (not sure when that is) but would like to understand why it wasn't considered a valid option. Thanks, Erin toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote: CNCF staff put it together. We try not to change it too much from survey to survey to make the results comparable, although there is a fundamental lack of statistical meaningfulness to the whole exercise. If you'd like to see changes in the next version, please let me know. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:03 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi, Can someone explain the process by which the survey sent in June [https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/cncf-survey-june-2018] is composed? Thanks, Erin
More All Messages By This Member
Dan Kohn <dan@...> #2148 https://www.cncf.io/blog/2017/12/06/cloud-native-technologies-scaling-production-applications/ The issue is that the question was treating OpenShift and Kubernetes separately, when we see OpenShift as a distribution of Kubernetes. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:26 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi Dan, Thanks for your quick reply. I am a little concerned by OpenShift being completely omitted from the survey all together. I would of course like to see it in the next survey (not sure when that is) but would like to understand why it wasn't considered a valid option. Thanks, Erin On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote: CNCF staff put it together. We try not to change it too much from survey to survey to make the results comparable, although there is a fundamental lack of statistical meaningfulness to the whole exercise. If you'd like to see changes in the next version, please let me know. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:03 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi, Can someone explain the process by which the survey sent in June [https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/cncf-survey-june-2018] is composed? Thanks, Erin
More All Messages By This Member
Quinton Hoole #2149 Agreed. If we included OpenShift I think we’d also need to include the other 59 certified Kubernetes distros and platforms, which seems infeasible/undesirable. Q *Quinton Hoole* *Technical Vice President* *America Research Center* *2330 Central Expressway, Santa Clara, CA 95050* *Tel: 408-330-4721 Cell: 408-320-8917 Office # E2-9* *Email: quinton.hoole@...* ID#Q00403160 From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Dan Kohn <dan@...> Date: Friday, July 6, 2018 at 20:26 To: Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> Cc: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...> Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] survey toggle quoted message Show quoted text https://www.cncf.io/blog/2017/12/06/cloud-native-technologies-scaling-production-applications/ The issue is that the question was treating OpenShift and Kubernetes separately, when we see OpenShift as a distribution of Kubernetes. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:26 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi Dan, Thanks for your quick reply. I am a little concerned by OpenShift being completely omitted from the survey all together. I would of course like to see it in the next survey (not sure when that is) but would like to understand why it wasn't considered a valid option. Thanks, Erin On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote: CNCF staff put it together. We try not to change it too much from survey to survey to make the results comparable, although there is a fundamental lack of statistical meaningfulness to the whole exercise. If you'd like to see changes in the next version, please let me know. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:03 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi, Can someone explain the process by which the survey sent in June [https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/cncf-survey-june-2018] is composed? Thanks, Erin
More All Messages By This Member
Erin Boyd #2150 Hi Dan, I know the CNCF only has the best intentions in mind and the survey is meant to better understand our community. However, there are some inconsistencies that should be addressed if we are wanting to separate product from project. As an example, chart 3 has several things I would consider products (Oracle, Alibaba), unless OpenShift Online is less than 1% I would see it as being appropriate to list here. Also, in terms of storage, unless the cloud native == CNCF, I would expect to see Container Native Storage/GlusterFS (also project not product in the list) in addition to Mino, Rook, etc... If I may, I think it might be a worthwhile exercise to review the survey as part of the TOC to propose a method by which the statistical representation is more meaningful, as you pointed out. In addition, clearly defining what we see in terms of a product vs. project as part of the CNCFs general definitions should be part of this exercise. I am sure you can agree, we want to see all projects/products equally represented regardless of the vendor. At this point, given Quinton's sentiment on the shear number or offerings of Kubernetes, it might be in the CNCF's best interest to be more vague in an effort to not unintentionally leave out a product. Maybe something more along the lines of: In your Kubernetes environment, do you use: - Just upstream OSS k8s (DIY) - Vendor provided k8s platform - Public cloud k8s service Where do you run k8s? - Private Cloud / Data Center - On public cloud resources - Using managed k8s service Thanks, Erin toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote: https://www.cncf.io/blog/2017/12/06/cloud-native-technologies-scaling-production-applications/ The issue is that the question was treating OpenShift and Kubernetes separately, when we see OpenShift as a distribution of Kubernetes. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:26 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi Dan, Thanks for your quick reply. I am a little concerned by OpenShift being completely omitted from the survey all together. I would of course like to see it in the next survey (not sure when that is) but would like to understand why it wasn't considered a valid option. Thanks, Erin On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote: CNCF staff put it together. We try not to change it too much from survey to survey to make the results comparable, although there is a fundamental lack of statistical meaningfulness to the whole exercise. If you'd like to see changes in the next version, please let me know. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:03 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi, Can someone explain the process by which the survey sent in June [https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/cncf-survey-june-2018] is composed? Thanks, Erin
More All Messages By This Member
Dan Kohn <dan@...> #2151 I agree that we could be clearer in some of the project/product distinctions. Next time, we'll add some additional reviewers to look at that issue. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 9:32 AM, Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi Dan, I know the CNCF only has the best intentions in mind and the survey is meant to better understand our community. However, there are some inconsistencies that should be addressed if we are wanting to separate product from project. As an example, chart 3 has several things I would consider products (Oracle, Alibaba), unless OpenShift Online is less than 1% I would see it as being appropriate to list here. Also, in terms of storage, unless the cloud native == CNCF, I would expect to see Container Native Storage/GlusterFS (also project not product in the list) in addition to Mino, Rook, etc... If I may, I think it might be a worthwhile exercise to review the survey as part of the TOC to propose a method by which the statistical representation is more meaningful, as you pointed out. In addition, clearly defining what we see in terms of a product vs. project as part of the CNCFs general definitions should be part of this exercise. I am sure you can agree, we want to see all projects/products equally represented regardless of the vendor. At this point, given Quinton's sentiment on the shear number or offerings of Kubernetes, it might be in the CNCF's best interest to be more vague in an effort to not unintentionally leave out a product. Maybe something more along the lines of: In your Kubernetes environment, do you use: - Just upstream OSS k8s (DIY) - Vendor provided k8s platform - Public cloud k8s service Where do you run k8s? - Private Cloud / Data Center - On public cloud resources - Using managed k8s service Thanks, Erin On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote: https://www.cncf.io/blog/2017/12/06/cloud-native-technologies-scaling-production-applications/ The issue is that the question was treating OpenShift and Kubernetes separately, when we see OpenShift as a distribution of Kubernetes. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:26 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi Dan, Thanks for your quick reply. I am a little concerned by OpenShift being completely omitted from the survey all together. I would of course like to see it in the next survey (not sure when that is) but would like to understand why it wasn't considered a valid option. Thanks, Erin On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Dan Kohn <dan@...> wrote: CNCF staff put it together. We try not to change it too much from survey to survey to make the results comparable, although there is a fundamental lack of statistical meaningfulness to the whole exercise. If you'd like to see changes in the next version, please let me know. -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:03 AM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote: Hi, Can someone explain the process by which the survey sent in June [https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/cncf-survey-june-2018] is composed? Thanks, Erin
More All Messages By This Member
Matt Farina #2152 Dan, When we performed the k8s apps survey we listed the tools we were aware of at the time (incomplete but a list) and did a cut line based on some measure of popularity (often github stars for projects there). It’s imperfect but provided a reason for the ones listed. We then included space for people to list other tools. Would it make sense for the CNCF to follow a similar method? Though, I’m unsure of the best way to handle commercial products but a reasoned common cut line would provide a reason, in general, we could debate. - Matt -- Matt Farina mattfarina.com
More All Messages By This Member

1 - 8 of 8

1

Previous Topic Next Topic

Home Hashtags Subgroups Terms