Question: Submit to CNCF

[bvalyou]

Are there any plans to submit Pkl to the CNCF?

Vaguely relevant: helm/helm#12780

[madrob]

Hi @bvalyou, can you highlight the benefits of submitting Pkl to the CNCF? AFAIU, Helm integration should be doable without it, if that's the main concern?

[bvalyou]

Hi @madrob, thanks for the quick response!

I guess the helm reference wasn't too useful. They're linked in my head because helm is a CNCF graduate project.

The main benefit is that the CNCF has a lot of clout in the Kubernetes community. If Pkl were a CNCF incubator project it would likely accelerate adoption and add to the pool of potential contributors.

My self-interested reason for asking is that it would allay some concerns within my organization about the long-term future of Pkl as a stable tool for managing k8s configurations.

Apple is also a Platinum CNCF member.

There are probably some downsides as well - e.g. potential overhead from CNCF governance.

[harryjackson]

My self-interested reason for asking is that it would allay some concerns within my organization about the long-term future of Pkl as a stable tool for managing k8s configurations.

Apple uses pkl internally so I don't think it's about to disappear and even if it did it's open source now. If you check the history the first commit was made in 2016.

commit ecad035dcaf8f49eba08bf816eba76bd581c87d3
Author: Peter Niederwieser <[email protected]>
Date:   Tue Jan 19 14:51:19 2016 +0100

    Initial commit

I've looked at multiple alternatives and pkl is by far the one that I've had the easiest time with. It's a significant step forward in this domain, the combination of ease of use, types, type aliases, late binding, defaults for maps etc, functions, classes, IDE Support and a host of other features make it a joy to use.

I've only been playing with it for a month and I'm still finding better ways to do things than anything I've previously used. It's a well designed tool and I think adoption is going to fast and widespread.