3 ms·

Kuberentes/CNCF governance is completely different than Openstack. There's a reason every major cloud provider is involved in CNCF versus Openstack. You can see

Kuberentes/CNCF governance is completely different than Openstack. There's a reason every major cloud provider is involved in CNCF versus Openstack. You can see all stats for CNCF projects here, i.e., https://k8s.devstats.cncf.io/dashboard/db/contributing-companies?orgId=1 https://k8s.devstats.cncf.io/dashboard/db/contributing-compa... CFF was setup in a completely different way, giving Pivotal a lot of control in the beginning by allowing related entities to have votes and than relinquishing that over time. It leads to a more single vendor controlled ecosystem IMHO. There's pros and cons to both approaches. Disclosure: I help run CNCF.

jacques_chester 9y ago
Pivotal's strong influence over CFF decisions comes from the fact that votes are assigned according to how many fulltime engineers you devote to Foundation work. Pivotal has more fulltime engineers on CFF projects than anyone else. There are, as you note, pros and cons. It made sense at the time, as I think there were concerns about vendor politics getting in the way of developing the thing. I guess one of these days we'll smash the CFF and CNCF together and stagger out with some kind of bicameral system, just for laughs. Disclosure: I work for Pivotal. Trolling is just my hobby.