From Fedora Project Wiki
(Created page with "Should Pivotal Cloud Foundry be in scope for PaaS? --~~~~") |
m (few thoughts from my mind.) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Should Pivotal Cloud Foundry be in scope for PaaS? --[[User:Stahnma|Stahnma]] ([[User talk:Stahnma|talk]]) 17:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC) | Should Pivotal Cloud Foundry be in scope for PaaS? --[[User:Stahnma|Stahnma]] ([[User talk:Stahnma|talk]]) 17:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC) | ||
--- | |||
== Suggestions from [[User:hguemar|hguemar]] == | |||
=== Use cases === | |||
Drop | |||
* PaaS node images (until OpenShift or another PaaS comes back on Fedora repo) | |||
* Big data images (not much move) | |||
Modify the following to include docker containers | |||
* Simple deployment | |||
=== Features === | |||
Drop | |||
* Docker image (transferred to another WG) | |||
* Big data tools | |||
=== Atomic Host === | |||
The PRD should reflect the Atomic Host importance in our strategy. | |||
== Notes from [[User:Roshi|roshi]] == | |||
Edit/Clean: | |||
* "Hybrid Cloud as Staging Area" has a typo in it | |||
* Requirement #3 states that releng doesn't have the tooling yet - but aiui they do. We just need a process to sign off on the images as passing our QA checks. | |||
General: | |||
* We should probably maintain a list of who's tracking what bits in the PRD. | |||
In response to [[User:hguemar|hguemar]]: | |||
* Do we need to drop docker from the PRD? Another WG has that feature, but we still want cloud to be a part of it - so I'm not sure we need to remove it. | |||
* I don't see any reason to drop the PaaS feature. That's still a high level goal of the cloud product, right? | |||
* The same could be said for the Big data tools feature. I'm not aware of any work going on with that, so I'm fine with dropping it if the interest isn't there any longer. | |||
== Suggestions from [[User:kushal|kushal]] == | |||
* Containers, containers and containers, we need more focus on this. | |||
* Atomic development will focus more on Fedora based on 2 week releases. | |||
In response to [[User:hguemar|hguemar]]: | |||
* I think docker is a big story for Cloud, the whole world's marketing plan is in and around of cloud+containers. | |||
Latest revision as of 10:46, 18 June 2015
Should Pivotal Cloud Foundry be in scope for PaaS? --Stahnma (talk) 17:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
---
Suggestions from hguemar
Use cases
Drop
- PaaS node images (until OpenShift or another PaaS comes back on Fedora repo)
- Big data images (not much move)
Modify the following to include docker containers
- Simple deployment
Features
Drop
- Docker image (transferred to another WG)
- Big data tools
Atomic Host
The PRD should reflect the Atomic Host importance in our strategy.
Notes from roshi
Edit/Clean:
- "Hybrid Cloud as Staging Area" has a typo in it
- Requirement #3 states that releng doesn't have the tooling yet - but aiui they do. We just need a process to sign off on the images as passing our QA checks.
General:
- We should probably maintain a list of who's tracking what bits in the PRD.
In response to hguemar:
- Do we need to drop docker from the PRD? Another WG has that feature, but we still want cloud to be a part of it - so I'm not sure we need to remove it.
- I don't see any reason to drop the PaaS feature. That's still a high level goal of the cloud product, right?
- The same could be said for the Big data tools feature. I'm not aware of any work going on with that, so I'm fine with dropping it if the interest isn't there any longer.
Suggestions from kushal
- Containers, containers and containers, we need more focus on this.
- Atomic development will focus more on Fedora based on 2 week releases.
In response to hguemar:
- I think docker is a big story for Cloud, the whole world's marketing plan is in and around of cloud+containers.