►
From YouTube: CNCF TOC Meeting 2020-03-17
Description
CNCF TOC Meeting 2020-03-17
A
A
B
D
B
B
B
B
C
All
right,
I
guess
we
could.
We
could
get
started
with
the
sort
of
preliminaries
when
we
can
just
step
through
those
initial
slides
about
antitrust.
We
all
made
it
to
the
conference
array
will
update
those
and
yes
so
and
in
the
last
sort
of
week
or
two
there's
obviously
been
a
lot
of
activity
around
projects
like
operates.
C
So
the
individual
projects
will
have
merits
that
will
want
to
debate
and
discuss,
but
I
think
we
should
also
just
step
back
a
bit
further
than
looking
at
the
individual
projects
and
think
about
how
we
want
to
best,
particularly
our
end
user
community,
in
terms
of
being
able
to
find
and
obtain
these
different
artifacts
and
yeah.
So
I
think
there's
a
another
slide.
C
E
Before
we
step
back
I,
think
I
would
be
appropriate
for
me
to
start
with
an
apology
where
there
has
been
a
lot
of
Sturm
and
Drang
about
this,
but
some
of
it
is
quite
deserted
where
Cynthia
should
be
operating
in
the
open
and
was
not
in
this
case.
The
context
is
that
I
had
organized
a
meeting
in
Cuba
on
San
Diego
of
some
folks
from
operator
framework
and
helm
and
Kudo
to
talk
about
the
idea
of
CNCs
helping
to
organize
a
hub
and
I'll
just
say
all
this
groups
were
open
to
it.
E
There
was
no
I
didn't
ask
for
commitment
and
they
weren't
making
one
and
when
I,
had
the
opportunity
to
work
with
a
couple,
well
respected
contract
developers
and
was
able
to
rely
on
a
spec
from
Matt
Farina
of
the
help.
Maintainer
I
kicked
that
off
and
the
goal
was
for
it
to
go
for
about
a
month
and
then
to
make
it
public,
essentially
that
got
delayed
by
like
another
month
a
month
and
a
half
because
of
all
the
issues
around
cube
con
and
needing
to
delay
that,
and
so
that
has
been
problematic.
E
I
do
want
to
apologize
for
it.
I
think
I've
caused
a
lot
of
hassle
for
people
which
I
did
not
tend,
so
the
aspiration
was
to
create
a
project
that
could
become
a
sandbox
project
of
C
and
C.
F
I
would
emphasize
that
it's
not
I
also
would
propose
a
name
change
where
I
think
assuming
it
is
a
sandbox
project,
it's
assuming
it
could
become
a
sandbox
project
and
then
emphasizing
that
this
is
pre-alpha
code.
E
But
then
there
are
a
ton
of
commonalities
and
I
think
we
can
see
in
something
like
NPM,
which
folks
probably
saw
got
acquired
by
github
this
week,
that
huge
industries,
like
all
front-end
software
in
the
world,
seems
to
often
rely
on
wind
up
relying
on
these
kinds
of
platforms
and
then
there's
a
lot
of
security
and
reliability
and
maintainability
and
update
ability
and
left
pad
and
all
sorts
of
issues
that
can
result
from
it.
And
so
I
do
want
to
emphasize
that
this
is
now
totally
in
the
open
that
assuming
it
does
before
word.
E
We
very
much
would
like
to
get
contributions
from
a
lot
of
different
folks
and
then
that
our
hope
would
be
that
it
would
become
a
cnc
of
hosted
project
that
would
have
a
set
of
maintainers
and
and
work
with,
presumably
sig
after
delivery,
and
then
critically
would
ultimately
have
an
appeal
up
to
the
TOC,
because
I
think
one
of
the
key
ideas
is
a
set
is
a
piece
of
neutrality
around
it
that
folks
understand
they
could
deal
with
them
such
so.
That
is
the
background.
These
links
have
essentially
all
the
information.
That's
there.
E
That
that's
really
saying
a
decision
of
the
TOC
and
and
I
think
there
was
some
confusion
on
that.
Early
on
I
mean
so
CMC
a--
has
created
several
pieces
of
software
like
dev
stats
that
we
offer
as
a
service
to
our
projects
and
the
interactive
landscape,
and
I
mean
we
have
like
that.
This
minor
thing
we're
working
on
right
now:
that's
gonna,
take
a
yeah
mo
file
and
a
github
repo
and
convert
it
to
a
Google
Calendar
entry
so
that
people
can
automatically
schedule
and
cancel
the
conferences
of
session.
E
This
seems
like
a
much
bigger
piece
than
that,
but
I
think
that
one
of
the
purpose
of
this
call
is
for
the
TOC
to
decide
what
it
should
be
when
it
grows
up,
but
I
would
just
emphasize
right
now.
It's
nothing
I
mean
it's
just
pre-alpha
software,
but
I
think
we
can
have
a
discussion
about
it,
assuming
that
it
did
the
children.
G
G
G
This
isn't
that
it
is
a
centralized
metadata
store
for
search,
and
so,
if
you
look
at
what
home
has
is
the
example
because
it's
what's
in
there
now,
you
have
repositories
that
are
hosted
in
many
different
places.
In
fact,
anything
that
conforms
to
a
repository
can
host
it,
and
so
people
use
the
static
built
in
one
that
comes
with
home
or
chart
museum
or
J.
G
Frog
off
disability
and
vendors
can
host
these
things
themselves,
and
then
this
provides
a
central
point
where
you
can
register
your
thing
and
then
it's
metadata
is
pulled
in
so
you
can
search
it,
but
anytime
you
get
the
artifacts
or
you
deal
with
it.
It
always
goes
back
to
the
root
source,
and
so
it's
more
like
a
metadata
search.
I
think
PHP
has
something
like
this
with
packages
where
they
don't
host
the
packages,
they're
hosted
in
github
and
in
other
places,
but
it
provides
a
central
discovery
point
for
things
that
are
distributed.
G
F
That
does
that
does
make
a
lot
of
sense,
because
I
I
kind
of
always
thought
this
was
more
like
home
hub,
which
was
monocular
and
I
kind
of
think.
I
was
a
little
confused.
It
was
a.
It
was
basically
a
running
instance
of
monocular,
but
but
if
it's
a,
if
it's
basically
a
search
engine
for
artifacts,
what
wedding
the
design
have
you?
What
thoughts
do
you
having
in
terms
of
how
to
rank
the
results.
G
That
is
a
wonderful
question.
Iii
haven't
put
much
thought
into
that
now.
Monocular
doesn't
do
much
with
that
and
as
far
as
the
design
of
this
it's
it's
pre-alpha
and
and
figuring
out
how
you
rank
things,
isn't
something
that
I've
put
much
thought
into
the
people
who've
been
developing.
It
may
have
put
more
thought
into
it,
but
there
are
things
like
official.
G
You
know
if
somebody
like
the
my
my
sequel
folks
put
out
artifacts
that
are
from
them.
It
would
be
great
if
there
was
a
way
to
note
that
and
bubble
those
up.
It
could
be
usage
if
we're
able
to
somehow
determine
that.
But
at
this
point
I
really
haven't
put
much
thought
into
it,
but
that
is
definitely
something
that
should
be
thought
about
yeah,
but.
E
Responding
to
a
question
on
chat,
but
that
we
have
to
contractors
based
in
Spain,
who've
done
the
development
and
been
so
far
been
doing.
The
partnering
with
us,
but
I
do
want
to
agree
that
I
think
it's
a
critical
question.
My
most
important
focus
on
the
results
I
mean,
if
you
just
search
for
I.
Think
MySQL
is
a
perfect
perfect
example,
where
there's
very
likely
to
be
multiple
helm,
charts
for
installing
it,
and
you
could
imagine
operator,
framework,
charts
and
other
formats
as
well.
E
The
most
critical
one
I'm
focused
on
is:
how
are
we
going
to
again
find
remove
any
malicious
ones
that
our
project
or
psa's,
but
then
the
assumption
is
that
we
would
be
pulling
in
metadata,
such
as
github
stars
or
other
kinds
of
indicators
for
it
and
then
allow
different
forms
of
sorting
and
and
in
such,
but
I
do
think
it's
a
really
critical
issue
about
how
you
percolate
the
quote:
best
unquote
option
to
the
top.
Thank.
F
I
Then
then,
you
know
probably
many
other
things
that
the
CN
CF
is
doing
so
so
from
from
a
support
point
of
view
who
you
you
know
you
have
my
full
support
and
I
think
the
support
of
a
lot
of
people
in
the
community
to
do
something
like
this.
That's
it,
though,
if
the
benefit
is
the
beneficiaries
of
this
or
the
end
users
shouldn't
the
end
users,
the
end
users
want
just
a
random
list.
I
You
know:
do
they
want
a
search
engine
that
gives
you
access
to
repositories
all
over
the
place
which
aren't
verified
or
curators
in
any
way
like
and
I
kind
of.
Do
really
believe
that
there
is
an
opportunity
here
to
have
the
cnc
of
perhaps
provides
a
curated
list
of
different
different
software
packages,
because
you
know,
like
I
mentioned
in
one
of
the
emails,
still
it
seriously
the
other
week.
I
Things
like
you
know
the
at
repose
in
the
RPM
reapers
that
the
linux
distributions
offer,
for
example,
have
been
key
to
to
adopting,
say
linux
technologies
right
and
if
we
look
back
at
history,
you
kind
of
have
these
these
moments
where
mass
technologies
were
adopted
and
almost
all
of
them
have
Co
resided.
It's
a
simple
way
to
get
a
curated
list
of
packages
and
software
with
highest
fees
and
software
vendors
and
the
community
in
general
can
participate
in
that
end.
I
G
So
may
it
may
make
a
couple
comments
on
us.
Curation
takes
a
significant
amount
of
work
and
effort
to
do,
especially
when
it
is
by
hand,
and
if
you
look
at
things
like
the
app
stores
that
are
out
there
that
do
a
lot
of
the
curation
and
put
work
into
it.
There's
just
a
lot
of
work
and
and
people
that
get
involved
in
that
whole
process,
and
so
there's
a
lot
of
work.
G
And
if
you
look
at
things
like
the
apt
repositories
and
the
repositories
for
the
different
package
managers
across
the
different
Linux
family
of
Linux
distributions,
there's
a
lot
of
just
time
that
goes
into
curating.
Those
lists
and
we
over
at
home
discovered
that
it's
very
hard
to
keep
up
with
that,
especially
with
the
pace
of
change
that
happens
it
for
us
on
home.
It's
it
has
become
unmaintainable
for
volunteers
to
do
that.
Work
and
so
I
would
expect
we'll
run
into
the
same
problem.
G
K
That
point
Matt
I
mean
this
is
exactly
how
kubernetes
is
evolved.
I
mean
I
can
speak
directly
to
to
storage,
for
instance,
and
having
to
test
that
and
validate
that
and
having
confidence
that
what
we're
putting
in
customers
hands
is
something
that
is
going
to
be
useful
and
not
potentially
harmful
to
the
customer
and
I
think
it's
still
critical,
so
I,
don't
I
mean
essentially
the
community,
we're
all
volunteers
and
I
think
you
know,
given
the
interest
yesterday
in
the
call,
there
are
a
lot
of
people
they're
interested
in
making
this.
K
You
know
a
lively,
accessible
product
and
I
think
if,
if
it's
especially
if
it's
hosted
by
the
CNCs,
that
that
has
a
that's
kind
of
the
rubber
stamp
of
what
people
look
to
in
the
industry
to
have
trust
in
it.
So
if,
if
we're
not
providing
that
level,
I
think
that
would
be
very
detrimental
to
to
offering
something
like
yeah.
G
G
You
know
what
information
gives
me
here
gives
me
trust
in
it,
and
so,
instead
of
the
decision
being
the
curators,
the
decision
is
put
in
the
ends
of
the
end
users
and
they're,
provided
a
ton
of
information
to
help
them
make
that
decision,
because,
ultimately
it's
if
you
curate
it's
the
organization
making
the
decision
and
not
the
end
users
who
get
the
choice
or
the
end
users
can
get
the
choice.
But
you
need
to
give
them
a
bunch
of
information,
and
it's
somehow
towing
that
line
and
do
we.
G
This
is
the
CNC
F
want
to
be
in
the
position,
the
people
who
do
the
curation
getting
enough
bodies
to
decide.
These
are
the
things
that
people
the
end-user
should
have
here,
or
do
we
want
to
be
in
the
position
of
saying
end
users,
here's
what's
available
and
we're
trying
to
give
you
enough
information,
so
you
can
make
that
decision
yourself
and
and
for
me,
I
would
actually
like
to
hear
from
the
end
user
community
that
we
have
as
part
of
the
CNC
F,
because
I'm
tentative
on
a
group
of
people
coming
together
to
decide.
G
I
That's
that's
perfectly
fine,
but
I
think
there
is
a
big
distinction
between
say
a
software
development
package.
You
know
like
homebrew
or
the
for
the
software
language
five
packages
because
they
are
different
packages.
But
what
we're
saying
here
is
we're
kind
of
doing
this.
This
global
search
of
metadata
and
now
people
can
search
for
at
CD
or
my
sequel
and
get
back
ten
different
results
for
the
same
package
except
they're.
I
This
is
the
developer
looking
at
code
this
this
this
is
this-
is
a
DevOps
guy,
that
or
or
or
or
or
a
team
that
beneath
or
install
a
database
instance
where
they
need
to
install.
You
know
some
some
type
of
software
from
this
repo
they're
they're,
not
actually
looking
to
compare
the
ten
different
ways
of
installing
the
one
package
they're
looking
for
the
right
way
to
install
the
one
package
so.
L
L
K
K
Would
it
usually
start
that
the
CN
CF
has
like
a
list
of
requirements
of
what
they
want
to
accomplish
as
an
organization
and
they
go
out
and
have
that
developed
because
now
I'm
given
conversations
we
had
yesterday
and
on
the
list,
then
we
were
also
talking
about
making
this
a
sandbox
project.
So
are
we
which
direction?
Are
we
going
because
the
sandbox
projects
essentially
can
do
whatever
they
want
and
bring
it
to
whatever
sig
is
appropriate
and
go
through
the
normal
process?
K
If
we're
talking
about
creating
a
CNC,
F
owned
and
managed
project
I
assume
I
mean,
is
that
gonna
follow
the
same
thing
or
that
are
that
the
two
mentioned
things
that
were
before
this?
Were
they
sandbox
projects,
I
I
feel
like
we're
like
getting
way
ahead
of
ourselves
talking
about
what
it
shouldn't
shouldn't
do
and
we're
not
even
talking
about
how
it
should
start
so.
C
I
think
you
could
make
the
same
point
in
Reverse
in
the
sense
that
there
are
some
existing
projects.
Should
we
be
adopting
those
as
sandbox
or
should
we
first
try
to
establish
what
kind
of
thing
we
want
to
get
out
of
this
kind
of
discovery,
distribution,
project
and
I?
Think
that's
why
I
felt
it
was
appropriate
to
kind
of
start
having
that
discussion.
C
You
know
there
there's
so
many
I
think
questions
around
whether
the
CNCs
should
do
this,
and
if
so,
you
know
to
what
extent
I
think
these
points
about
curation
search,
ranking,
they're,
extremely
valuable
and
I.
What
I
was
really
concerned
about
is,
if
we
start
getting
some
sandbox
projects
in
then
we'd
sort
of
by
default
be
following
a
certain
route
or
maybe
a
couple
of
alternative
routes,
but
that
we
wouldn't
necessarily
really
have
strategically
thought
about
what
is
the
best
way
for
and
user
community
to
be
able
to
get
hold
of
these
different
artifacts
I.
A
C
J
Whether
there's
a
need
for
a
more
they
combined
discovery
for
helping
charts
operators
and
other
things
is
I
think
one
discussion
and
we
want
to
have
it.
The
second
one
is
is
for
me
still
kind
of
like
this,
this
process,
how
this
went
out
at
sea
and
no
offense
here,
but
it
feels
like
some
people
had
an
idea.
They
hired
people,
they
implemented
a
that.
There
were
presented
it
back
and
now
we
should
accept
it
into
sandbox,
I'm,
exaggerating
a
bit
here
so
I'm
totally
with
this
here
should
be
first
it
here.
J
But
do
we
want
this?
That
discussion
should
have
started
in
the
open?
You
really
take
the
air
and
you
brought
up
as
well
things
like
two
steps
back.
What
do
we
really
want?
Which
value
you
want
to
provide
to
the
end
user
community?
What
is
the
best
approach
to
go
forward,
and
then
we
find
how
we
want
to
do
this,
because
even
for
packages
I
can
think
that's
a
ton
of
things
that
run
into
issues.
There's
many
distributions
out
there.
J
How
can
it
fences
against
my
distribution
if
they're,
if
there's
10
my
sequel
operators
that
might
work
against
my
distro?
Some
might
not
work
because
they're
not
built
properly?
How
can
I
even
say?
Please
don't
install
this
against
and
I'm
just
taking
one
year,
Ranger
or
open
ships.
So
there's
a
lot
of
discussions,
I'm
taking
two
steps
back
and
not
discussing
the
project
submission.
First,
it's
the
right
way
to
go.
J
C
So
and
I
put
up
some
discussion
points
that
you
know
pulled
together
from
various
different
people's
comments
and
we
don't
have
to
take
these
in
any
particular
order
and
in
fact,
Diane
just
posted
in
the
chat.
There's
CNC
I
have
either
the
mandate
or
engineering
resources
to
host
the
infrastructure
infrastructure
for
I.
Guess
a
marketplace
hub:
what's
the
funding
model
and
resourcing
model,
don't
you
want
to
speak
a
bit
about
funding
for
this
kind
of
thing,
sure.
E
B
N
N
H
E
N
I
think
that
the
meeting
that
we
had
in
San
Diego
that
keeps
getting
referred
to
was
really
about
having
a
very
informal
conversation
about
the
unification
of
some
of
the
stuff
from
operator
framework
and
helm,
and
it
was
about
kicking
off
some
cross
community
collaboration.
It
wasn't
really
about
kicking
off
any
sort
of
CN
CF
marketplace,
though
that
was
mentioned
at
one
point,
but
there
it
has
been
no
requirements,
gathering
no
survey
of
the
community
and
no
request
from
the
community
for
this
effort
that
I
have
seen
in
the
public
domain.
N
C
C
Do
we
want
to-
and
it
feels
premature
to
me
that
we
would
make
an
assumption
that
says
there
is
going
to
be
just
one
central
source
for
this,
but
I
think
that
does
have
consequences
for
the
TOC
assessment
of
projects
you
know
so,
for
example,
do
we
want
to
it
operate
a
hub
at
the
moment
is
part
of
operator
framework.
Do
we
want
to
be
acting
under
a
working
assumption
that
that
continues
as
an
independent
thing
that
there
will
be
some
kind
of
Darwinian
action
that
decides
which
of
these
different
sources
should
happen?
C
N
C
Did
we
anticipate
when
we
drop
those
principles?
This
idea
of
end
user
convenience
for
finding
these
artifacts
I'm,
not
saying
we
should
or
shouldn't
have
a
central?
You
know
repository
for
this
kind
of
thing.
I'm
saying
this
has
very
significant
consequences
for
our
end
user
community.
So
I
think
it
was
just
a
question
that
we
needed
to
open
up
to
to
discussion
so.
G
I
I
do
have
a
quick
thought
on
this
right.
The
Foundation's
mission
is
to
make
cloud
native
computing.
You
know
ubiquitous
right
and
there's
also
goals
of
fostering
and
caring
for
the
projects
we
want
them
to
help
grow.
We
want
them
to
get
out
there
to
a
wide
audience,
and
this
is
all
baked
into
the
Charter.
G
There's
projects
that
already
have
them
like
the
cloud
native
security
hub,
but
that's
still
disjointed
and
disconnected
when
people
don't
even
know
where
to
look
and
by
making
discovery
easier.
I
believe
we're
gonna
help
grow
the
entire
space,
because
everything
becomes
more
discoverable
easier
to
find
easier
to
use
and
install
and
get
going
with,
and
that
will
end
up
helping
the
end
users
get
moving
more
quickly.
I
I'd
like
to
have
a
slightly
differing
view
on
that
I
think
there
already
a
number
of
curated
lists
of
software
right
I
mean
helm.
Hub
is
one
of
them,
but
you
know
the
operator
hub
has
a
certification
process.
The
the
rancher
catalog
has
a
certification
process,
different
cloud
providers
or
setting
up
marketplaces
and
those
and
there's
a
you,
know
curated
lists
and
those
are
genuinely
useful
to
end-users.
I
I
In
fact,
I'd
actually
argue
that
that
might
actually
slow
their
own
adoption,
because
it
makes
things
harder
to
understand
and
it
creates
this,
this
perception
of
complexity
and
it,
and
it
actually
slows
down
the
sort
of
critical
mass
adoption
where,
where
the
technology
gets
adopted,
that's
a
layer
that
doesn't
require
expertise
at
so
many
different
levels
of
the
stack.
That's
that's
the
point
I'm
trying
to
make
here
if
we
are
going
to
create
the
discovery
service-
and
this
is
a
service-
not
a
project
right,
whether
or
not
we
develop.
The
software
is
another
matter.
I
But
if
we're
developing
a
service
that
offers
discovery,
then
it's
beneficial
to
the
end-users.
If
it's
curated
and
there's
some
level
of
clarity
as
to
what
the
end-user
should
pick
and
it's
not
to
say
that
you
know
we
should
pick
just
one
thing:
maybe
there
are
different
packages
for
this
or
different
distributions
or
whatever
that's
fine
too,
but
it
it
shouldn't
just
be
a
random
list
of
every
operator
or
every
helm.
I
Artifact
that's
found
in
any
github
random
repository
right.
It
has
to
be
some.
There
has
to
be
some
level
of
curation,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
if
we're
going
to
do
this,
we're
offering
a
service-
and
this
is
another
project-
it's
a
service
that
their
end
users
are
consuming
and
we
know
the
end.
Users
are
already
confused
by
the
the
stay
fed
landscape.
Nobody
looks
at
the
landscape
picture
that
we
put
together
because
we
allow
everybody
to
to
to
go
into
that
and
says:
oh
yeah
now
I
know
exactly
what
to
do.
L
Mean
I
just
want
to
point
out
that,
like
pretend
an
example
would
be
NPM,
NPM
has
no
curation
and
it
works
quite
well
for
people
because
of
what
Matt
said
about
the
metadata.
So
when
you're
gonna
load
an
empty
impact,
if
you
look-
and
you
see
when
was
it
last
updated
how
many
other
people
are
using
it,
you
know
what's
its
license
and
it's
relatively
easy
to
make
a
decision
so
I,
don't
think
that
curation
is
the
great
goal
here.
L
A
E
L
K
Brendon,
would
you
agree,
though,
if
someone
so
is
always
from
four
years
ago,
this
has
been
the
issue
is
perception
and
when
people
go
out
to
the
CN
CF
and
they
look
at
the
landscape,
and
this
is
why
we've
had
so
many
arguments
over
sandbox
people
put
their
trust
in
this
foundation
that
when
they
publish
something
that
it
is
a
good
choice
that
it's
been
you
know
the
due
diligence
has
been
done.
There's
some
level
of
curation
that
that
they
can
trust
that
so
I
think
there's
a
matter
of.
K
If
we
provide
this
service
that
people
are
putting
their
trust
in
us
and
how
much
do
we
want
to
ensure
that
their
experience
and
what
they're
using
it
for
at
least
from
Alex
and
I
stock
we've
done
at
various
Cube
cons?
Every
single
talk,
people
come
up
and
say:
I,
don't
know
what
I'm
supposed
to
be
using.
L
P
L
K
L
I
would
think
I
think
that
it's
I
think
I
I.
Don't
disagree
at
all
I
think
it's
a
good
idea,
but
I
think
that
there's
a
distinction
between
an
index
or
a
repository
for
discoverability,
which
is
not
something
that
I
think
really
provides
that
versus
a
publisher
which
prep,
which
is
so.
If
CN
CF
decided
to
publish
a
helmet
art,
for
example,
or
CN
CF
decided
to
publish
an
operator,
then
I
think
you're.
Absolutely
right.
L
C
C
M
I
company
is
shut
down
on
non-essential
communication
app
to
use
my
like
my
personal
phone
for
these
colors
now,
so
they
don't
consider
this
EF
an
essential
use
of
my
job,
so
I'm
sorry
trying
to
navigate
things
on
the
cell
phone
is
not
easy,
yeah.
So
the
so
you
know
end-users,
don't
we
don't?
You
know
we
don't
get
confused
as
easy
as
you
guys
think
we
do
and
we
have
a
business.
M
That
would
time
the
support
and-
and
you
know
things
like
fraud
and
analytics-
aren't
hard
to
figure
out
what
we
need
to
do
and
so
for
the
most
case,
our
requirements.
We
do
not
whatever
you
think
you're
gonna
cure
it
for
us,
isn't
gonna,
be
curated
enough,
so
we're
gonna
curate
it
ourselves,
no
matter
what
you
guys
try
to
provide.
M
Having
a
single
place
like
you
know,
the
CN
CF
hub
would
be
great
because
we
have
you
know.
At
least
you
know
one
less
set
of
things
to
have
to
try
to
curate
right
now
we
have
about
17
different
pipelines
to
go
out
and
curate
with
17
different
artifact
repositories,
and
then
itself
is
not
hard
to
solve
for
and
something
we
software,
but
you
know
having
a
single
place
for
this
type
of
use.
Case.
I
think
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
M
Q
Great
feedback,
I
I
think
like
it'd,
be
nice
to
just
it
doesn't
seem
like
people
object
to
this
initiative,
so
I'd
really
love
for
us
to
talk
about
how
to
kind
of
move
forward,
but
then
also
leave
room
later
to
kind
of
build
on
these
requirements.
With
specific
end
user
surveys
like
Ken
just
provided
really
good
feedback.
So
maybe,
if
we
could
find
a
nice
MVP
to
agree
on,
we
can
just
move
forward
from
there
with
hard
data
from
end
users.
On
on
what
features
we
really
want
to
support
and.
M
Q
M
Well,
very
well,
Billy
or
very
adamant
on
the
no
key
makers.
Type
of
you
know,
I'm
charter
that
we
developed
in
the
CN
CF,
and
so
I
don't,
I
don't
believe
any
of
the
end
users
are
wanting
to
make
trying
to
provide
any
sort
of
feedback.
That
would
allow
me
sort
of
keep
making
to
happen
and
so
I
think
in
general.
You'd,
be
very.
You
know,
pleased
with
the
hype
of
interaction
and
feedback
that
the
end
user
community
can
provide
in
this
area.
G
C
C
It
was
interesting
that
you
know
the
fact
that
doc
around
the
docker
hub
and
were
able
to
you
know,
maintain
that
site
and
continue
to
maintain
that
site
was
probably
an
instrumental
part
of
the
success
of
container
images,
docker
images
so
I,
just
I
I,
wonder
whether
anyone
has
any
thoughts
around
the
impact
of
this
on
vendors
and
whether
it's
a
good
thing
and
it
we'll
be
a
very
good
thing.
I
just
wanted
to
raise
it
as
a
discussion
point.
L
L
I
think
we
should
distinguish
going
to
parts
of
the
hub.
I.
Think
one
is
the
the
free
image
repository,
which
I
think
was
very
great
I.
Think
the
other
piece
was
Dockers
decision
to
make
their
own
images
sort
of
privileged
within
the
hub,
which
is
I,
think
probably
not
good
right.
So,
like
the
only
if
you
do
docker
run
my
sequel,
that
is
on
the
only
way
that
exists
is
with
a
image
that
docker
controlled.
L
I
mean
and
I
know
it's
a
Jojo,
bata
and
others,
or
some
of
the
people
who
really
brought
up
this
concern
a
long
time
ago,
with
docker
about
how,
like
I,
mean
I,
think
helm
would
have
the
same
problem
right
like
one
of
the
good
things
in
helm.
3
is
that
you
have
to
install
every
helm
repository
via
URL.
L
There
is
no,
you
know,
helm
stable,
whatever
isn't
just
sort
of
built
into
hell,
and
that's
so
the
again
you
don't
put
your
thumb
on
the
scales
and
I
think
if
you
look
at
any
of
the
good
package
managers
that
are
truly
open.
This
is
true.
Like
act
like
app,
do
you
have
to
have
a
file
that
lists
all
your
repositories?
It's
not
like.
It
goes
to
1,
2
or
Debian
by
default
and
and
I.
C
C
Guess
my
initial
sort
of
feeling
on
that
is
that
it's
probably
easier
to
go
from
a
sandbox
project
to
a
service
than
the
other
way
around.
So
perhaps,
while
we're
still
in
this
early
phase-
and
you
probably
don't
want
to
be
singling
too
strongly
to
two
users-
that
this
is
in
some
way
sort
of
blessed
yet
maybe
sandbox
is
the
better
experimentation
approach.
Yeah.
A
I
would
think
so
I
mean
Dan
specifically
said
it's
pre-alpha
and
no
one
should
use
it
at
this
point.
So
I
don't
see
how
we
could
possibly
agree
to
run
it
as
a
service.
At
this
point,
and
given
that
there's
so
many
outstanding
questions
about
what
kind
of
things
it
shouldn't
shouldn't
do,
that
are
quite
fundamental
I
think
it
makes
much
more
sense
for
it
to
apply
as
a
sandbox
project.
A
N
Other
part
of
yesterday's
conversation
was
also
that
if
we
ran
it,
if
it
stood
itself
up
as
an
open-source
project
that
it
could
be
something
that
CN
CF
ran
as
a
service
or
someone
might
run
and
stand
up
internally
as
a
service
behind
their
own
firewall.
So
if
we
created
this
project
in
a
way
that
it
could
be
deployed
anywhere
and
CN,
CF
just
created
a
service
out
of
it.
E
C
N
I
think
that,
for
me,
part
of
the
I
think
the
curation
conversation
here
is
a
really
good
one.
Also
the
testing
and
the
C
ICD
pipeline
behind
it.
We've
had
lots
of
conversations
with
people
around
the
operator
framework
and
in
testing
and
certification
and
how
important
that
is
so
getting
that
right
in
the
infrastructure
is
going
to
be
key
and
I
think
that
you
know
might
take
some
reframing
andrey
architecting
of
the
existing
code
base.
You.
R
Just
wanted
to
say
that
running
a
service
is
actually
very
time-consuming
and
takes
a
lot
of
resources
right,
so
so
yeah.
So
having
that
choice
for
for
people
to
run
the
service
internally
and
their
own
in
their
own
organizations,
I
mean
it
would
be
great,
but
you
know
thinking
about
like
hosting
repository
a
repository
for
everyone
around
the
world.
You
know
you
something
like
that.
R
You
know
C
SEF
would
we
require
a
lot
of
resources
and
you
know
something
that
we'll
be
able
to
handle
like
large-scale
deployments
right
so
so
maybe
that
will
be
something
that
could
be
used
for
certain
types
of
users
that
wouldn't
require
large
scale.
But
if
you
want
something
to
have
reliability
and
in
you
know,
we
done
done
sea
and
all
those
different
type
of
the
production
type
of
things
you
know
having
that
choice,
doing
run
it
in
their
own
private
networks
or
their
own
cloud
will
be
great
I.
C
R
R
But
you
know
you
look
at
docker
hub,
you
know
they.
They
were
being
used
by
so
many
people
around
the
world.
Right
so
and
then
I
would
imagine.
Docker
had
like
a
this
massive
infrastructure
behind
it
right
so
and
and
that's
what
I'm
getting
at
like
you
know
having
something
like
that
requires
massive
scale.
Yeah.
G
And
I
think
the
one
difference
here
is
docker
was
actually
hosting
all
of
those
images
and
those
large
files,
and
so
they
had
to
do
so.
Many
things
because
they're
doing
the
hosting
bit-
and
this
is
a
lots
of
artifacts-
are
distributed
all
over
and
this
is
a
centralized
metadata
search
and
it
doesn't
new,
the
actual
hosting.
So
it
isn't
holding
all
of
the
helm
charts
for
example,
or
other
bits
that
are
going
to
come
in
after
the
home
tarts,
those
are
hosted
by
others.
S
G
Be
eventually
consistent,
dependent
on
update
cycles
and
catching
and
notifying.
So
if
somebody,
for
example,
has
they've
they've
said,
here's
a
group
of
assets
that
need
to
be
listed
and
we've
detected
problems.
How
do
we
enlist
those?
How
do
we
notify
people
that
there's
problems
because
many
times
they
are
accidental?
That's
all
just
in
building
that
out
and
building
out
the
user
experience
not
just
for
the
end
users,
but
for
the
people
who
list
their
things
to
be
curated
as
well.
C
With
three
minutes
left
in
the
hour,
I
just
wanted
to
briefly
touch
on
operator
friendly,
because
we
put
that
assessment
somewhat
on
hold
so
that
we
can
have
this
conversation
more
broadly
and
in
the
remaining
three
minutes.
Does
anyone
have
anything
they
want
to
say
about
operator
framework
and
what
we
should
be
thinking
about
in
terms
of
that
project?
I.
T
Hey
this
is
gotta,
hear
I'm
here
from
Alcide
we
are
a
security
company
and
I
mean
operator
hub
is
considered
as
the
North
Star
of
a
very
cool
concept
of
operators.
What
I'm
wondering
like
from
a
security
perspective
like
what
kind
of
the
diligence
was
made
around
you
know
introducing
components
into
that.
In
some
cases
it
makes
ton
of
sense,
but
in
some
cases
it's
a
nonsense-
and
you
know
speaking
here
on
CN,
CF,
hub
and
and
the
resemblance
into
operator
up
would
be
interesting
to
hear
like.
What's
the
TMC
perspective
on
that.
L
Along
those
lines,
I
was
gonna
say
that
I
think
that,
having
had
all
this
discussion,
the
TSA
sort
of
owes
the
community
a
description
of
what
our
goals
are.
For
this
kind
of
stuff
I
mean
I,
have
no
problem
with
just
putting
all
you
know,
put
all
the
hubs
into
sandbox,
just
like
we've
put
up
lots
of
other
competing
projects
at
this
handbooks.
Although
you
know
it's
the
TOC
decision,
not
a
one-person
decision
and
I
do
think.
Also,
given
all
the
sort
of
discussion
we
we
owe
the
community
a
description
of
life.
K
And
I
I
think
we
talked
about
that
at
length
as
part
of
this
exact
sig,
apps
discussion
and
I.
Don't
think
that
was
contentious
say,
but
but
would
it
be
worthwhile
since
we've
had
this
very
long
thread
going
on
in
the
PR
to
maybe
be
back
with
the
project
and
clarify
any
misconceptions?
I
just
think
a
lot
of
things
have
been
lost.
Maybe
in
that
concept.
H
L
L
J
I
think
that
they
operate
that
people
have
been
waiting
for
quite
a
while,
so
I
think
giving
this
some
attention
right
now.
It's
tough
to
do
right.
Time
is
just
what
I
wanted
to
point
out
and
if
we
can
get
this
and
one
of
the
next
you
see
meetings
that
would
be
beneficial.
I
think
it
has
been
almost
four
beautiful
months
of
they
have
been
waiting.