[cf-dev] CF vs PAS4BOSH vs PAS4K8s vs TKG

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[cf-dev] CF vs PAS4BOSH vs PAS4K8s vs TKG

Daniel Jones
Hi all,

Would it be possible for someone from VMware MAPBU to clarify a few terms for the benefit of the community?
  • Is PAS4BOSH a synonym for CF as currently packaged? Do y'all use the terms interchangeably?
  • Is PAS4K8s simply CF packaged in a Kubernetes-native format, or something else? 
  • Should the community pay heed to discussions about PAS4K8s because that will affect/trickle down to open source CF, or is this proprietary-only code forevermore?
  • Is TKG in any way related to the OSS CF community, or is this an internal project that we should disregard as none of our business?
These questions came up as a result of reading the comments on CF-RFC 030:
  • "are we sure we want to invest that much time and effort in CF?"
  • "Would we imagine doing this in PAS4BOSH? [...] Or maybe just going forward for PAS4K8s and TKG work"
  • "I imagined this only for CF (not PAS4K8S)"
  • "Many teams are shifting focus to PAS4BOSH" (assuming this is a typo and the author meant PAS4K8s)
It's great that folks are having these discussions in the open, and I wouldn't want to discourage this from happening. I also appreciate that things are probably in flux and being figured out currently.

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CTO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists
_._,_._,_

Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#8839) | [hidden email] | [hidden email] | Mute This Topic | New Topic


Reminder that all communication on this mailing list is subject to the Cloud Foundry Foundation's code of conduct, which can be found here: https://www.cloudfoundry.org/code-of-conduct/
Your Subscription | [hidden email] | Unsubscribe [[hidden email]]
_._,_._,_
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [cf-dev] CF vs PAS4BOSH vs PAS4K8s vs TKG

Davanum Srinivas
Daniel,

As i understand it, TKG is an internal project unrelated to either OSS communities (CF or k8s).

Thanks,
Dims

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 5:00 AM Daniel Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

Would it be possible for someone from VMware MAPBU to clarify a few terms for the benefit of the community?
  • Is PAS4BOSH a synonym for CF as currently packaged? Do y'all use the terms interchangeably?
  • Is PAS4K8s simply CF packaged in a Kubernetes-native format, or something else? 
  • Should the community pay heed to discussions about PAS4K8s because that will affect/trickle down to open source CF, or is this proprietary-only code forevermore?
  • Is TKG in any way related to the OSS CF community, or is this an internal project that we should disregard as none of our business?
These questions came up as a result of reading the comments on CF-RFC 030:
  • "are we sure we want to invest that much time and effort in CF?"
  • "Would we imagine doing this in PAS4BOSH? [...] Or maybe just going forward for PAS4K8s and TKG work"
  • "I imagined this only for CF (not PAS4K8S)"
  • "Many teams are shifting focus to PAS4BOSH" (assuming this is a typo and the author meant PAS4K8s)
It's great that folks are having these discussions in the open, and I wouldn't want to discourage this from happening. I also appreciate that things are probably in flux and being figured out currently.

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CTO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists



--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims
_._,_._,_

Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#8840) | [hidden email] | [hidden email] | Mute This Topic | New Topic


Reminder that all communication on this mailing list is subject to the Cloud Foundry Foundation's code of conduct, which can be found here: https://www.cloudfoundry.org/code-of-conduct/
Your Subscription | [hidden email] | Unsubscribe [[hidden email]]
_._,_._,_
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [cf-dev] CF vs PAS4BOSH vs PAS4K8s vs TKG

Eric Malm
In reply to this post by Daniel Jones
Hi, Daniel,

In general, "PAS" refers to VMware's commercial distribution of CFAR. "PAS4K8s" is shorthand for the K8s-targeted version currently under pre-GA development, and "PAS4BOSH" is the parallel construction referring specifically to the current BOSH-based product. As with Pivotal/VMware's previous commercialized CFAR products, we intend to build PAS4K8s on top of project development taking place openly in the CFF community.

That said, I would encourage commentary on the document to focus on contributions to and development of those CFF projects, and not to any vendor-specific concerns or products.

Thanks,
Eric

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 2:00 AM Daniel Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

Would it be possible for someone from VMware MAPBU to clarify a few terms for the benefit of the community?
  • Is PAS4BOSH a synonym for CF as currently packaged? Do y'all use the terms interchangeably?
  • Is PAS4K8s simply CF packaged in a Kubernetes-native format, or something else? 
  • Should the community pay heed to discussions about PAS4K8s because that will affect/trickle down to open source CF, or is this proprietary-only code forevermore?
  • Is TKG in any way related to the OSS CF community, or is this an internal project that we should disregard as none of our business?
These questions came up as a result of reading the comments on CF-RFC 030:
  • "are we sure we want to invest that much time and effort in CF?"
  • "Would we imagine doing this in PAS4BOSH? [...] Or maybe just going forward for PAS4K8s and TKG work"
  • "I imagined this only for CF (not PAS4K8S)"
  • "Many teams are shifting focus to PAS4BOSH" (assuming this is a typo and the author meant PAS4K8s)
It's great that folks are having these discussions in the open, and I wouldn't want to discourage this from happening. I also appreciate that things are probably in flux and being figured out currently.

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CTO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists

_._,_._,_

Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#8841) | [hidden email] | [hidden email] | Mute This Topic | New Topic


Reminder that all communication on this mailing list is subject to the Cloud Foundry Foundation's code of conduct, which can be found here: https://www.cloudfoundry.org/code-of-conduct/
Your Subscription | [hidden email] | Unsubscribe [[hidden email]]
_._,_._,_
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [cf-dev] CF vs PAS4BOSH vs PAS4K8s vs TKG

Daniel Jones
Ta!

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CTO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists


On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 15:49, Eric Malm <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi, Daniel,

In general, "PAS" refers to VMware's commercial distribution of CFAR. "PAS4K8s" is shorthand for the K8s-targeted version currently under pre-GA development, and "PAS4BOSH" is the parallel construction referring specifically to the current BOSH-based product. As with Pivotal/VMware's previous commercialized CFAR products, we intend to build PAS4K8s on top of project development taking place openly in the CFF community.

That said, I would encourage commentary on the document to focus on contributions to and development of those CFF projects, and not to any vendor-specific concerns or products.

Thanks,
Eric

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 2:00 AM Daniel Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

Would it be possible for someone from VMware MAPBU to clarify a few terms for the benefit of the community?
  • Is PAS4BOSH a synonym for CF as currently packaged? Do y'all use the terms interchangeably?
  • Is PAS4K8s simply CF packaged in a Kubernetes-native format, or something else? 
  • Should the community pay heed to discussions about PAS4K8s because that will affect/trickle down to open source CF, or is this proprietary-only code forevermore?
  • Is TKG in any way related to the OSS CF community, or is this an internal project that we should disregard as none of our business?
These questions came up as a result of reading the comments on CF-RFC 030:
  • "are we sure we want to invest that much time and effort in CF?"
  • "Would we imagine doing this in PAS4BOSH? [...] Or maybe just going forward for PAS4K8s and TKG work"
  • "I imagined this only for CF (not PAS4K8S)"
  • "Many teams are shifting focus to PAS4BOSH" (assuming this is a typo and the author meant PAS4K8s)
It's great that folks are having these discussions in the open, and I wouldn't want to discourage this from happening. I also appreciate that things are probably in flux and being figured out currently.

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CTO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists

_._,_._,_

Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#8843) | [hidden email] | [hidden email] | Mute This Topic | New Topic


Reminder that all communication on this mailing list is subject to the Cloud Foundry Foundation's code of conduct, which can be found here: https://www.cloudfoundry.org/code-of-conduct/
Your Subscription | [hidden email] | Unsubscribe [[hidden email]]
_._,_._,_