If it ends up being not open, then we'd have to. But they're clearly not going in that direction given they've already published it publicly and have requested feedback.
I would strongly urge us to avoid this, however. A common spec is so much stronger than any individual one. On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Arunabha Ghosh <arunabha...@gmail.com> wrote: > Should CoreOS decide to adopt a governance model which is not open or what > the Mesos community wants, does it make sense to adopt the Rocket spec and > evolve it along with Mesos ? Having a documented container spec for Mesos > which can evolve along with Mesos would in some ways be better than perhaps > adopting Rocket's spec. > > Arunabha > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Dave Lester <daveles...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Thanks, I'll take the discussion to the GitHub issue. >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Tim Chen <t...@mesosphere.io> wrote: >> >>> Hi Dave, >>> >>> I actually can't remember is it on the github issue, email list or >>> twitter feed, but definitely one of them. >>> >>> Tim St Clair just brought up Apache on #139, and I'm a +1 on that as >>> well. >>> >>> Feel free to chime in on that Github issue you linked. >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Dave Lester <daveles...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey Tim C, >>>> >>>> Out of curiosity, which GitHub issue are you referring to when you say >>>> "Apache >>>> is one of the options mentioned"? >>>> >>>> I don't see it it in the discussion thread for >>>> https://github.com/coreos/rocket/issues/139, but I would love to find >>>> it and +1 the idea. Moving to Apache would be great to see. >>>> >>>> Dave >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Timothy Chen <t...@mesosphere.io> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Tim, >>>>> >>>>> Definitely I agree, i think what I am getting at is that it's clear >>>>> from the conversation that a open governance is what they want from day >>>>> one. Apache is one of the options mentioned one the Issue, and I believe >>>>> something along that line is most probable. >>>>> >>>>> As long as that's true it won't be as difficult as other options to >>>>> maintain as an containerizer option for us. >>>>> >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> On Dec 3, 2014, at 9:42 AM, Tim St Clair <tstcl...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> inline below >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> *From: *"Tim Chen" <t...@mesosphere.io> >>>>> *To: *u...@mesos.apache.org >>>>> *Cc: *"dev" <dev@mesos.apache.org> >>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, December 3, 2014 11:20:47 AM >>>>> *Subject: *Re: Rocket >>>>> >>>>> Hi Tim, >>>>> >>>>> I see you've already commented on the rocket repo about this, and from >>>>> their messaging it aims to be independent which should be the whole point >>>>> of the open container spec. >>>>> >>>>> I'm all over this like white on rice. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think the best way is just to be involved in the spec early on and >>>>> continue to do so while we move forward, and we have relationships with >>>>> the >>>>> rocket people which should help also being in the loop as well. >>>>> >>>>> Relationships alone won't cut it. >>>>> Friends one day, enemies the next, isn't that the way it worked with >>>>> Docker...? >>>>> >>>>> Governance, such as Apaches model, is of critical importance. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Tim St Clair <tstcl...@redhat.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Not to put too fine a point on it, but how are folks planning on >>>>>> establishing governance around the App Container spec? >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/coreos/rocket/issues/193 >>>>>> >>>>>> If the mesos community decides to leverage our own, how do we ensure >>>>>> that we have say in the spec going forwards? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Tim >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> > From: "Tobias Knaup" <t...@knaup.me> >>>>>> > To: u...@mesos.apache.org >>>>>> > Cc: "dev" <dev@mesos.apache.org> >>>>>> > Sent: Monday, December 1, 2014 11:39:58 PM >>>>>> > Subject: Re: Rocket >>>>>> > >>>>>> > An important point to clarify is that two things were announced: a >>>>>> spec >>>>>> > (App Container) and an implementation (Rocket). >>>>>> > Here is the spec: >>>>>> > https://github.com/coreos/rocket/blob/master/app-container/SPEC.md >>>>>> > This separation of spec and implementation is important. It makes >>>>>> it much >>>>>> > easier to integrate in Mesos. systemd is also just the >>>>>> implementation of >>>>>> > the runtime part of the spec that CoreOS chose for Rocket. Mesos >>>>>> can use >>>>>> > something else or come with its own. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Dominic Hamon < >>>>>> dha...@twopensource.com> >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > Instead of considering the Rocket runtime as implemented, we >>>>>> should >>>>>> > > instead consider how we can implement their specification. A >>>>>> community is >>>>>> > > always healthier when there are multiple implementations of a >>>>>> > > specification, and through implementing it we may find ways to >>>>>> improve it. >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > Also, this allows us to be a strong voice in the community and >>>>>> provide >>>>>> > > value through a C++ implementation. >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > I've created a JIRA ticket >>>>>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2162 to track any >>>>>> thoughts on >>>>>> > > this. >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Tim Chen <t...@mesosphere.io> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >> Hi all, >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> Per the announcement from CoreOS about Rocket ( >>>>>> > >> https://coreos.com/blog/rocket/) , it seems to be an exciting >>>>>> > >> containerizer runtime that has composable isolation/components, >>>>>> better >>>>>> > >> security and image specification/distribution. >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> All of these design goals also fits very well into Mesos, where >>>>>> in Mesos >>>>>> > >> we also have a pluggable isolators model and have been >>>>>> experiencing some >>>>>> > >> pain points with our existing containerizers around image >>>>>> distribution and >>>>>> > >> security as well. >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> I'd like to propose to integrate Rocket into Mesos with a new >>>>>> Rocket >>>>>> > >> containerizer, where I can see we can potentially integrate our >>>>>> existing >>>>>> > >> isolators into Rocket runtime. >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> Like to learn what you all think, >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> Thanks! >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > -- >>>>>> > > Dominic Hamon | @mrdo | Twitter >>>>>> > > *There are no bad ideas; only good ideas that go horribly wrong.* >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Timothy St. Clair >>>>>> Red Hat Inc. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Timothy St. Clair >>>>> Red Hat Inc. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- Dominic Hamon | @mrdo | Twitter *There are no bad ideas; only good ideas that go horribly wrong.*
