Putting on my party hat! Thank you everyone for your careful consideration on this. I believe we've surfaced some very real issues with governance that I hope we visit during the summit.
I have the utmost respect for all of you, and your dedication to making this the absolute best project possible. On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 10:58:33 AM UTC-4, Sarah Novotny wrote: > > PoR > -- SIG-Azure gets created O(now) > -- SIG-Cloud gets discussed and planned at Leadership Summit O(weeks) > -- All the cloud providers are belong to us (and collaborate through > SIG-Cloud or the result of the Leadership Summit discussion) O(months) > > Jason, let's get this SIG started. > > :) > > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Steve Gordon <sgo...@redhat.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Ihor Dvoretskyi" <ihor.dv...@gmail.com <javascript:>> >> > To: "Sarah Novotny" <sarahn...@google.com <javascript:>>, "Tim Hockin" >> <tho...@google.com <javascript:>>, sgo...@redhat.com <javascript:> >> > Cc: "Eric Tune" <et...@google.com <javascript:>>, "jack quincy" < >> jaze...@gmail.com <javascript:>>, "Kubernetes developer/contributor >> > discussion" <kuberne...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>>, "Kubernetes >> user discussion and Q&A" >> > <kubernet...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>> >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 7:06:18 AM >> > Subject: Re: SIG-Azure proposal >> > >> > > I don't remember if SIG-Openstack weighed in on that one. >> > >> > We did (both +Steve Gordon <sgo...@redhat.com <javascript:>> and me). >> > >> > Personally, I would like to see SIG-Azure or WG-Azure under SIG-Cloud - >> it >> > doesn't matter globally. I expect that people who have >> > Azure+Kubernetes-related questions will have a single door to enter with >> > the questions (as SIG-OpenStack holds the door for OpenStack+Kubernetes >> > relationship). The same is about Azure-related technical initiatives at >> > Kubernetes community. >> >> Yes, my POV is +1 on SIG-Azure for *right now* given there appear to be >> people willing to pick up this mantle and it's consistent with the way the >> other providers are handled but also +1 going forward to how we would >> potentially re-align within a hypothetical SIG-Cloud in the future. I do >> envisage that there would still be individual workgroups and meetings for >> each provider under such a structure but we do I think need some greater >> level of co-ordination between these teams to ensure we're delivering a >> consistent experience to Kubernetes users particularly as we look to >> externalize and potentially modularize aspects of the cloud provider >> framework implementations as they exist today. >> >> -Steve >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Kubernetes user discussion and Q&A" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kubernetes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to kubernetes-users@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/kubernetes-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.