I think that being a part of a Kubernetes SIG is good. In reading the FAQ on RH about the relationship with RH and Kubernetes, it seems like RH may want to keep options open to other projects in the future if anything were to happy to Kubernetes (Mesos/libswarm/etc). And as things become more container-native (using compose, and things like Hyperkube), there's no reason Atomic couldn't use Swarm or Mesos. If RH is fully onboard with only Kubernetes long-term, then being within the Kubernetes SIG makes total sense. If not, it could put off Mesos and Docker groups. Ref: https://connect.redhat.com/zones/303/faq/200#1115
I really don't want to be too opinionated on this; it's not my call and they're mostly personal opinions on tooling (which can be frustrating, I understand). My thought is this; what's going to gain the widest and most agnostic audience for the benefit of Atomic and it's users? IRC is great, but not everyone uses it unfortunately. Personally, email is my *most* loathed method of communication *in general*. It's slow, not secure in many cases, and massively abused and overused by SIG and "Mitchell" and "Rita", you're friendly corporate Office Managers. Can you imagine if Trystack went to an email support model? OMG...shoot me at close range with a rubber-band machine gun! There are some great points about running multiple Slack groups via web or phone, but there are IRC integrations for Slack (I'm sure we all still use IRC, right?) and the Slack applications for Linux, Windows and OSX make using multiple groups nearly seamless. Am I the only one who thinks that the Slack application is actually really good? I'm on 6-7 different slack groups, so I get the frustration. Could using Slack for Atomic rot on the vine like it did with CoreOS? That's possibly be a fair thought too. So would an Atomic SIG group in Kubernetes be the best, or is an Atomic group with a Kubernetes, Docker, Cockpit, Nelecule, RPM-OSTree SIG groups make the most sense? Just tossing some of my [sort-of-unimportant] thoughts out there. I kind of lean towards the latter, but in the end...*anything* is better than freaking email... On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Justin Garrison < justin.garri...@disneyanimation.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 7:56 AM, <atomic-devel-requ...@projectatomic.io> > wrote: > >> Do you think kubernetes would give us a channel? Frankly, we don't need >> more than one. >> > > You can sign up for a SIG which gets an email list (not that another is > needed) and a channel. > > > https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/wiki/Special-Interest-Groups-(SIGs) > > > I think it'd be a good alternative unless (as bex pointed out) there > will be a desire to have separation from k8s or multiple channels for > -users, -devel, fedora, centos, atomic-cli, etc. > > > -- Justin > -- Brandon
