On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:49 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
On 10/29/2013 09:30 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 2:46 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> <johannbg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it would make most sense for Cloud and Server to "share
> applications", i.e. the same application package can be deployed
> either within a single-purpose Cloud image (automatically managed for
> horizontal scaling), or as a single instance within a Server (one of
> many applications running on this particular Server).
We see things quite differently here I look at a server servicing one or
more server application ( including hosting the cloud ) and the cloud first
foremost a deliver method of server application.
I think we actually agree on this, in general.
So we ( as in the server WG ) handle all the server applications and
solution surrounding that while the cloud WG handles the deliverable and the
configuration aspect of the server applications.
Here we might disagree: I think it's far easier to keep the
application and the "configuration aspect" working well if they are
both done by the same group. And "configuration" is not something
specific to cloud - it needs to be done when deploying the application
both to cloud and to the server; the special thing about cloud is the
(automatic?) horizontal scaling.
As for "all the server applications", I do want as many as possible
available, but to me some _are_ more important than others, and
deserve specific attention of the Server WG, and specific integration
within the product.