Re: [IMPORTANT] 2017 PaaS Certification Requirements

Daniel Jones

But BOSH is not what the customer is buying
If they've read the High Availability page
<> before
making a decision, then they reasonably could be.

If BOSH is not part of the certified platform then this messaging *must*
change. I'd proffer that disentangling the value-add of BOSH from those of
Cloud Foundry in the marketing materials would be a really worthwhile
exercise for those wanting BOSH to be a more widely-adopted tool.

Daniel Jones - CTO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
@DanielJonesEB <>
*EngineerBetter* Ltd <> - UK Cloud Foundry

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Ronald Nunan <ronald.nunan(a)> wrote:

Per Aaron’s and few other comments:

*Long Answer: *I agree that BOSH can be better, as can all software ;-).
However, the certification process for offerings isn't about
experimentation in the ecosystem. It's about consistency across the
distributions. Requiring BOSH as the deployment method gives us two key
things: (1) much more consistency for operators of the platform and (2) a
consistent target (really a least common denominator) for ISV's packaging
software for backing services. The value of consistency year over year
doesn't diminish the value of experimentation outside of the certified

It worries me that we are strengthening the how, specific implementation,
as a higher goal than what can be innovated and accomplished within the
The comment that this will make BOSH stagnant is worthy of concern. It
also assumes that BOSH’s implementation needs to be raised in importance
which somewhat removes it from needing to compete with alternatives.
Competition is good for the project. Specifically, with alternative
deployment options on the market that are both garnering good healthy
attention and innovating at a rapid rate, elevating BOSH's specific
implementation to this level seems limiting. Case in point, to think that
a decision for a certification like this can stop innovations like what
Stackato has just brought to market as a currently certified product
exemplifies the issue. To put innovations like this at risk to strengthen
operator consistency or to simplify how to evaluate talent seems unneeded.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.