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.

Reply via email to