tag-app-delivery
tag-app-delivery copied to clipboard
cncf
Blog post: Platform Engineering Through the Lens of Two-Sided Markets
Deploy Preview for tag-app-delivery ready!
| Name | Link |
|---|---|
| Latest commit | f02d636ba661605be87ac05633a5f6a78f3b8101 |
| Latest deploy log | https://app.netlify.com/sites/tag-app-delivery/deploys/660c57c46a2b770009ac5dd1 |
| Deploy Preview | https://deploy-preview-515--tag-app-delivery.netlify.app |
| Preview on mobile | Toggle QR Code...Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link. |
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.
![netlify[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/13473?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
Great, thanks for opening this @nagyv !
I think you'll need to manage the DCO failure, there are some instructions for how to do that in the CI step.
In addition, it would be great to remove the "draft" status so we can see it on the blog preview (to review headings etc).
@joshgav / @roberthstrand it would be great to get a review of this!
Thank you for this @nagyv! I did an initial review now and will read again soon, a couple thoughts:
Is there an opportunity to discuss "Thinnest Viable Platform" in the context of build versus buy? Could we emphasize more that even if an organization buys most of a platform from GitLab or another vendor they'll still be responsible for the "thinnest layer" on top, even if that's just documentation pointing to e.g. GitLab?
I'm also a bit concerned that the only vendor mentioned is GitLab and @nagyv you're a PM for GitLab :rofl: - perhaps it would come off better to mention another vendor or two as well - WDYT?
Thanks again for the submission!
The title of the post is currently Platform Engineering Through the Lens of Two-Sided Markets, so I wonder if the proposed path for the post the-economics-of-the-cncf-platform-engineering-model might be updated to better agree with the title?
Hey @nagyv, happy new year! I know the end of the year ended up a bit hectic and bogged down by illness. I am hoping you are still interested in posting this blog and I would love to continue supporting you if there is anything I can do? For example, we definitely still need a final review from TAG leadership (I think @joshgav had this on a todo list somewhere?).
Thanks for the review @lianmakesthings.
I think that blockers have been met by the disclaimer, additional tool examples, and softening of language around defining the category.
I would love to see @nagyv get this published. With that in mind, IMO all open suggestions (including yours @lianmakesthings) should be optional as at the end of the day this is a community post and while different people have opinions this post appears to meet community guidelines and if a community member wants to write on a similar topic with a different voice or from a different angle that would be also be welcome.
I know it has been a long road @nagyv and that the start of the year can be a hectic time but please do let me know what I can do to help get this published for you!
@nagyv it would be great to see this merged - could you review @lianmakesthings 's comments please?
Hey @nagyv, any word on if/when you may want to review this for merge? Would love to get this on the site!
Sorry everyone, I got distracted by life. I'm back on this now, and hope to have everything answered this week.
The title of the post is currently
Platform Engineering Through the Lens of Two-Sided Markets, so I wonder if the proposed path for the postthe-economics-of-the-cncf-platform-engineering-modelmight be updated to better agree with the title?
Fixed