For years, the CNCF has been the central governance body for cloud-native projects. But are there too many projects now? What if the CNCF was less governance and more like private equity?
SHOW: 804
CLOUD NEWS OF THE WEEK - http://bit.ly/cloudcast-cnotw
CHECK OUT OUR NEW PODCAST - "CLOUDCAST BASICS"
SHOW SPONSORS:
SHOW NOTES:
WHY DOESN’T THE CNCF RECOMMEND A CLOUD-NATIVE STACK?
- Originally the CNCF was just trying to get projects to use them for governance.
- Many people wanted them to “define” a cloud-native stack.
- Defining a stack would have held back their business model - accepting projects and adding sponsors
HOW MANY PROJECTS WOULD GET “CNCF APPROVED” IF THEY TOOK A PRIVATE EQUITY APPROACH?
- CNCF currently has 184 projects, up 4x over the last 4 years.
- 14% graduates, 20% incubating, 62% sandbox
- Does the CNCF suffer from the “Big Tent” problem that caused so many issues with OpenStack?
- KubeCon keynotes are just a list of projects giving status updates - they could be an email.
- How many projects should the CNCF sponsor? How many categories should remain?
- How would a private equity group apply metrics to CNCF projects?
FEEDBACK?
