For years, the CNCF has been the central governance body for cloud-native projects. But are there too many projects now? What if the CNCF was less governance and more like private equity?

SHOW: 804

CLOUD NEWS OF THE WEEK - http://bit.ly/cloudcast-cnotw

CHECK OUT OUR NEW PODCAST - "CLOUDCAST BASICS"

SHOW SPONSORS:

Want to win a Tesla Cybertruck or $100,000? Enter the WS02 Choreo Code Challenge (before August 23rd)
WSO2 Choreo - Why build a platform? Just add developers instead

SHOW NOTES:

WHY DOESN’T THE CNCF RECOMMEND A CLOUD-NATIVE STACK?

Originally the CNCF was just trying to get projects to use them for governance.
Many people wanted them to “define” a cloud-native stack.
Defining a stack would have held back their business model - accepting projects and adding sponsors

HOW MANY PROJECTS WOULD GET “CNCF APPROVED” IF THEY TOOK A PRIVATE EQUITY APPROACH?

CNCF currently has 184 projects, up 4x over the last 4 years.
14% graduates, 20% incubating, 62% sandbox
Does the CNCF suffer from the “Big Tent” problem that caused so many issues with OpenStack?
KubeCon keynotes are just a list of projects giving status updates - they could be an email.
How many projects should the CNCF sponsor? How many categories should remain?
How would a private equity group apply metrics to CNCF projects?

FEEDBACK?

Email: show at the cloudcast dot net
Twitter: @cloudcastpod
Instagram: @cloudcastpod
TikTok: @cloudcastpod

What if the CNCF was private equity?

The Reasoning Show