Hi Tal,

Sound great ! is there a link on the ONAP Wiki page you can share?

BR,
Ran Pollak

From: onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Tal Liron
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2018 4:28 AM
To: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Building blocks for multicloud k8s plugin, RE: 
[coe] Team meeting Agenda

Hi everyone,

I've been following the conversation silently for a while, but it might be time 
to jump in --

I am working on a training tutorial for Go, for my own team, and would be happy 
to pass it on to anyone involved in ONAP. It's meant for veterans like you who 
just need some pointers for the main stumbling blocks of this productive 
language.

In Beijing next week I will be giving two talks related to the technologies 
discussed. In one, I will present a tool to deploy directly to Kubernetes from 
TOSCA models. In the second, I will introduce "operators" as a way to create 
domain-specific clustering in Kubernetes, which I think we'll be seeing more 
and more of in the Kubernetes space. All of this work is in Go.

(For what it's worth -- despite finding Go extremely useful, I'm actually not 
sure that Go is the best choice specifically for writing operators. I'll 
discuss the issue in my talk.)

I can probably contribute more significantly to the COE project, but I must be 
honest and say that I have serious concerns about its overall approach. I am 
not convinced that it's fruitful to treat Kubernetes as a VIM. This is 
especially apparent as we see more and more truly cloud-native services that 
manage their own lifecycles. Not only do they know best, but the custom code to 
self-manage (operators) is embedded within the service. (That's why it's "cloud 
native".) There's just so much more to Kubernetes then deploying replicated 
pods. As a small example, on topic: I can't see having the ObjectMeta.Name as 
having meaning externally in all but the most trivial Kubernetes applications.

I see that the COE project is moving forward confidently, so I hope we can talk 
more and perhaps find ways in which I can work with you constructively. I'm 
sure that despite disagreement we can find some overlap in our goals and help 
make ONAP better.
This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,

you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer 
<https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
_______________________________________________
onap-discuss mailing list
onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss

Reply via email to