Add cri-o proposal #177
Add cri-o proposal #177
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
Description tweaks Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
Datica https://datica.com/compliant-kubernetes-service/ Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
|
On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 16:52 -0500, Jonathan Boulle wrote:
@jonboulle commented on this pull request.
In proposals/cri-o.adoc:
> +*Release methodology and mechanics*
+
+Major releases are matching to Kubernetes major releases.
+Minor releases are as needed.
+
+*Social media accounts*:
+
+* Blog: https://medium.com/cri-o/
+
+*Existing sponsorship*:
+
+* Red Hat (lead)
+* Intel
+* SuSE
+
+*Adopters*:
Could you speak a little more to what their adoption practically
consists of?
Sure thing. I didn't add that before, because it wasn't present on the
other proposals I referenced.
|
|
On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 22:40 -0500, Akihiro Suda wrote:
@AkihiroSuda commented on this pull request.
In proposals/cri-o.adoc:
> +- mikebrow
+- sameo
+- rhatdan
+- nalind
+- giuseppe
+
+*Infrastructure requirements*: CI, CNCF Cluster, TravisCI
+
+*Issue tracker*: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cri-o/issues
+
+*Mailing lists*
+
+* #cri-o on Freenode IRC
+* https://kubernetes.slack.com/messages/crio
+
+*Website*: http://cri-o.io
no TLS?
Oh interesting. It's a github.io site. I'll look into why it doesn't
redirect to https://
|
Add information on adopters. Consistent case sizing on "cri-o" Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
|
I have been pinged by a few folks about whether this proposal could be related to decisions about rkt as a CNCF project. That is a fine point, but should be a distinct conversation to be had separate from this proposal. |
removed LGPLv3 dep from list cri-o/cri-o#1936 Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
SUSE casing and links Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
finally got the https:// fixed for cri-o.io Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
|
all current points addressed. PTAL |
| - sameo | ||
| - rhatdan | ||
| - nalind | ||
| - giuseppe |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For those wondering, initial committers is made up of people from Red Hat, Suse, Intel, and IBM.
Instead of Initial Committers should these be labeled Maintainers?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
that's a fine suggestion. I was mimicking prior proposals, but they would be initial maintainers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does CNCF have distinct definitions for Committers and Maintainers?
| * #cri-o on Freenode IRC | ||
| * https://kubernetes.slack.com/messages/crio | ||
|
|
||
| *Website*: https://cri-o.io |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I noticed on the website the branding says:
Lightweight Container Runtime for Kubernetes
Would the change to the CNCF also be shifting it from one "for Kubernertes" to one that others can use for other purposes as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if those other use cases only conform to the kubernetes CRI, then maybe but numero uno is k8s. 😄
| In short CRI-O is a building block of a Kubernetes cluster, to facilitate the life cycle of containers as required by the Kubernetes Container-Runtime-Interface (CRI). | ||
|
|
||
| CRI-O was born in kubernetes-incubator and grew to production stable there. | ||
| Some have claimed since being a kubernetes project that it is already "a CNCF project", but it is often left as an after thought in brand, awareness and support as a top-level project. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Where is it you want the brand and awareness to go? Is there some form of support you are looking for as a top level project?
For example, when Helm shifted out of Kubernetes there was a need for help organizing Helm conferences (currently prepping for a second) and it had many contributors (it's the 3rd most contributed to CNCF project) where support for scaling that was needed.
Is cri-o looking to be more than a container runtime for k8s? Is there something else going on?
I ask these questions as I'm curios to understand more of where cri-o is going.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm glad that kubernetes-incubator was renamed kubernetes-sigs, but cri-o has outgrown that level of incubation.
And truthfully due to not getting the same level of press as containerd or rkt, I get feedback that folks infer it is not considered on the same level.
No cri-o conferences needed. 😃
|
FWIW, containerd and rkt are both "container runtimes" in the CNCF. Another example of similar things is etcd and TiKV as key/value stores. There doesn't appear to be a criteria that only one project of a type be in the CNCF. |
|
committers = folks who have the ability to commit code (i.e., commit bit)
Generally use committers/maintainers interchangeably
…On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 9:53 PM Akihiro Suda ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In proposals/cri-o.adoc
<#177 (comment)>:
> +*License*: ALv2
+
+*Maturity Level*: Incubating
+
+*Source control repositories*: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cri-o
+
+*Initial Committers*:
+
+- mrunalp
+- runcom
+- cyphar
+- mikebrow
+- sameo
+- rhatdan
+- nalind
+- giuseppe
Does CNCF have distinct definitions for Committers and Maintainers?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#177 (comment)>, or mute the
thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD5IctBDNfIvLbr-gK2Nd1jCwMFrhppks5vD_OegaJpZM4Y4J7I>
.
--
Cheers,
Chris Aniszczyk
http://aniszczyk.org
+1 512 961 6719
|
|
What is the next step here? |
|
we are going to start scheduling presentations soon for projects (new
meeting time)
you'll also need to find a TOC sponsor to call a vote
you'll get an update next week on presentation times
…On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 6:53 AM Vincent Batts ***@***.***> wrote:
What is the next step here?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#177 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD5If9e4QCOcLvcCwvt17J2EV-892sAks5vSE_ngaJpZM4Y4J7I>
.
--
Cheers,
Chris Aniszczyk
http://aniszczyk.org
+1 512 961 6719
|
caniszczyk
moved this from In progress (due diligence)
to TOC Approved (sponsors/voting)
in TOC Project Backlog
|
I'm sorry I haven't kept up with CRI-O so some of these questions may be answered elsewhere but I didn't see them explicitly called out in this proposal. What's the state of CRI-O's support in k8s? Last I looked at it it was an alpha release not supported in k8s yet. |
|
@rothgar hey hey, CRI-O has been out of alpha since Oct 2017 which was around k8s v1.7, then with k8s v1.8 CRI-O began it's release versioning to match kubernetes. We've have production users (besides Red Hat internal) since before CRI-O was v1.0. Today there are a number of large scale down to smaller shops. Not all want to be publicly listed, which we respect. |
|
CRI-O has officially joined the CNCF incubator :) +1 binding TOC votes (6/9): |
caniszczyk
moved this from TOC Approved (sponsors/voting)
to Done
in TOC Project Backlog
cc @monadic @jonboulle @bgrant0607 @bcantrill @benh @skamille @quinton-hoole @samlambert @kenowens12 @caniszczyk
Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts vbatts@hashbangbash.com