
Google donates money to help run the Kubernetes infrastructure - coloneltcb
https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/29/google-steps-back-from-running-the-kubernetes-infrastructure/
======
boulos
Disclosure: I work on Google Cloud.

I think the headline confuses the issue. The community wanted more input and
ability to control the release and testing process for Kubernetes. It was a
fair question to say "Why can only Google cut a release?". We're still happy
to fund it, but to make Kubernetes more fully owned by the community and not
Google, this was an important step.

Edit: Fwiw, I think William's blog post
([https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/gcp/google-cloud-
gran...](https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/gcp/google-cloud-grants-9m-in-
credits-for-the-operation-of-the-kubernetes-project)) is more informative,
since the TechCrunch article just quotes from it.

~~~
rockostrich
The headline is definitely confusing. I thought it was implying that Google
was no longer going to use Kubernetes at all. The first couple of sentences of
the article cleared that up, but the title should've been something like
"Google hands off Kubernetes development to open source community."

~~~
boulos
Even that's not quite right :).

"Google opens up the management of Kubernetes testing and releases with the
community" (or something).

------
BenTheElder
Disclosure: I work at Google on Kubernetes CI / Infra etc.

The tooling, configs, etc are all open source [1] (and largely run on
Kubernetes!), but the actual deployments have been Google operated. This is
about opening up access to operation of the deployments. I'm not about to stop
working on the automation etc. :-)

[1] [https://github.com/kubernetes/test-
infra](https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra)

Edit: if anyone is interested in more, we have a post out on the Kubernetes
blog today about some of the infrastructure:
[https://kubernetes.io/blog/2018/08/29/the-machines-can-do-
th...](https://kubernetes.io/blog/2018/08/29/the-machines-can-do-the-work-a-
story-of-kubernetes-testing-ci-and-automating-the-contributor-experience/)

~~~
pvg
It's really great that Google people are coming forward to clarify it but
what's with the scare-disclosurinating? Your affiliation is not a source of
potential conflict of interest with some detail of what you have to say. It's
the most relevant bit and the reason you can make a knowledgable comment. Say
it loud, say it proud, etc...

~~~
thockingoog
I just want to be transparent. Everyone has an agenda, I don't want to be
perceived as "sneaky" (have been accused in the past, even changed my
username)

~~~
pvg
Yeah that is great and you should say it, when it matters. It's just that none
of you are journalists who are write regularly and are expected by their
audience to be reasonably neutral and who then disclose potential random
conflicts in a standardized parenthetical.

You can just say 'I work at Google on whatnot and here is what I
know/think/etc'. Lighthearted Suggestion: There's no need at all to write like
HK-47 or Dwight Schrute.

~~~
thockingoog
Appreciate the feedback. From my end, I have been both accused of name-
dropping (ooh, look at Mr special, he works at Google!) and of having an
unstated agenda (hey, he's a phony, he works there!).

I found that simply stating is the compromise. I am not using my employer.ent
to justify my opinion, just making my alignment clear.

And in fact, I align with Google AND with Kubernetes.

~~~
pvg
Yep, I understand it's fraught and as I've just amply demonstrated, someone is
always going to whine about something. It's just weird to see you all line up
one after the other and and robotically announce your affiliation in the
format typically used for unexpected-conflict-of-interest when it's actually
important, not a conflict and you're trying to be helpful.

That and I enjoy the largely futile but infinitely noble fight against various
HN-mandated atrocities against basic English style and I want you to be free.

------
caniszczyk
FYI this headline is wrong is in now way is Google "stepping back" \- this is
Google becoming more open/transparent with how they traditionally handled
CI/CD for the Kubernetes project.

Disclosure: I help run CNCF.io

------
dang
Since people are complaining about the title, I took a crack at making it less
misleading. If anyone can suggest a better (i.e. more accurate and neutral)
title, we can change it again. It's a bit hard for an outsider to read exactly
what happened here, or why it matters.

~~~
thockingoog
That's better. I really see this as "Google opens administration of Kubernetes
infra, donates $9M in credits to keep it running".

~~~
thockingoog
We could also just link to Google's blog.

[https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/gcp/google-cloud-
gran...](https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/gcp/google-cloud-grants-9m-in-
credits-for-the-operation-of-the-kubernetes-project)

------
gdsdfe
Yeah the title is misleading, makes it sound like Google is abandoning the
project

------
thockingoog
Disclosure: I worked on this grant.

TL;DR is that CNCF owns kubernetes, but until now I could not include non-
Google people in the administration of (ostensibly) community owned stuff
(google.com security policies in GCP). Now I can.

Google's involvement and commitment is in no way diminished, this is just a
bad headline.

~~~
weberc2
I've not been an avid reader of TechCrunch in the past, but there seems to be
a trend of poor, baity headlines (and often story angles) at least among
articles that make it to HN. Not sure if they've always been this way, if I'm
reading the wrong articles, or if they're another casualty of declining
integrity across the industry.

------
madeuptempacct
So, this is unrelated, but since there are some googlers here - does Google
really pay mediocre senior developers $250,000, on average?

~~~
foobaw
Define mediocre. Google's hiring process is great but not perfect. Someone can
always slip through the cracks in any company. As for compensation, Google
can't differentiate who is worth 250K and who isn't solely based on the hiring
process. A "mediocre" engineer getting paid 250K will likely not get promoted
within the proper time and could be forced to leave.

------
willvarfar
Anyone got a gdpr;dr for those of us who don't want to click ok on their
cookiewall?

~~~
rboyd
Google tired of fronting the bill for k8s dev infra, welcomes CNCF to the
neighborhood with $9m housewarming gift to maintain.

~~~
thockingoog
That's hyperbolic. Part of the announcement is a commitment to re-evaluate the
numbers as time goes on.

Google is in No Way stepping back from this.

~~~
rboyd
Uh I tried to summarize in the same tone as the article. That’s kind of the
point of a tldr. I agree the article was clickbait and it’s obvious Google
wouldn’t abandon kubernetes.

Thanks for the downvotes though.

------
vfc1
When Google gives projects back to the comunity like this it usually also
means that they will stop investing so many internal resources on them, and
will move on to the next product.

~~~
thockingoog
We gave this project to CNCF years ago, and Google is still pretty heavily
invested in Kubernetes. :)

This is the end of the last vestige of exclusive control.

------
grx
> _Google doesn’t say so outright, but it’s fair to assume that it wanted
> others to shoulder some of the burdens of running the Kubernetes
> infrastructure, too._

Might be a far fetched, but this might play together with the Commons Clause
discussion. Nobody wants to do all the work without being compensated, while
others make profits with the work.

I hope the transfer of projects to foundations and other open forums
continues, and they are backed by industry leaders making the profits.

It should even go as far as finally paying solo-developers through some fairly
devided pool of funds. Everybody wins when libraries are free, openly
developed, production ready _and_ financially backed for LTS.

