Update adoptions.yaml #10
Conversation
|
The VMware adoption was Harbor, but that's no longer a VMware owned project – it was donated to the CNCF. |
That explains it. Thanks! We should still remove, I guess. |
|
AFAIK we should remove VMware. I haven't been able to figure out if the OPAM integration is still ongoing or not. Even if it is, do we consider conex to be a TUF implementation or a TUF inspired system? It's not clear to me where we want to draw the line with integrations that aren't 100% TUF but are definitely inspired by TUF. The recent Guix work also comes to mind, in that it cites TUF. My understanding is that Conex is ~= a TUF implementation/integration but the Guix approach is only inspired by, though I admit I've not dug into either (only read blog posts). |
|
Okay, what about DigitalOcean? |
Agreed. Maybe we should say something like "Inspired by", but not "Ongoing integrations". |
Can't find any references to TUF or Notary in the current code, please double-check. |
+1 from me. Maybe with smaller logos, or no logo, to de-emphasise them? |
Right, and we can even mark some integrations as abandoned (like Rubygems), if so desired. |
|
Let's just remove abandoned things, I think.
I'm not sure what to do with "inspired"... Maybe a separate section, but
it feels like we would need them to do a post or some other public mention
for us to point to.
…On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 11:51 AM Trishank Karthik Kuppusamy < ***@***.***> wrote:
+1 from me. Maybe with smaller logos, or no logo, to de-emphasise them?
Right, and we can even mark some integrations as abandoned (like
Rubygems), if so desired.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#10 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGROD3X3MIQWD4TPCZ3ONLR4BXPDANCNFSM4O2CAW2A>
.
|
Should we just remove them for now, then? |
|
It makes sense to me. I don't want to be accused of overclaiming,
especially by someone in that community.
…On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 1:17 PM Trishank Karthik Kuppusamy < ***@***.***> wrote:
I'm not sure what to do with "inspired"... Maybe a separate section, but
it feels like we would need them to do a post or some other public mention
for us to point to.
Should we just remove them for now, then?
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#10 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGROD3K4WEIMTRRJXUZIK3R4CBSXANCNFSM4O2CAW2A>
.
|
Ok, let me know what to remove, and I'll do it. |
|
If we're removing VMware, shouldn't the main page be fixed too? https://deploy-preview-10--theupdateframework.netlify.app/ |
Done. Anywhere else? Also see theupdateframework/python-tuf#1086 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the fixes, @trishankatdatadog! There are still a couple of tiny issues left.
trishankatdatadog
force-pushed
the
patch-2
branch
from
543b65a to
1f530c2
Compare
|
All, did some serious pruning, perhaps a bit overboard, but please take a look. |
|
cc @mnm678 |
trishankatdatadog
force-pushed
the
patch-2
branch
from
1f530c2 to
edde535
Compare
Added: * CNAB Security. Replaced: * Amazon with Bottlerocket. * Google with Fuchsia. * ATS with HERE. Removed: * VMware because Harbor now transfered to CNCF. * DigitalOcean because their do-agent no longer seems to use Notary. * RubyGems because the Square PR has never been merged. * IBM container registry because redundant with Notary. * Azure container registry because redundant with Notary. * Docker because original blog post seems to be gone; also, redundant with Notary. * Quay because no more reference to using Notary. * LEAP because Bitmask no longer seems to be using TUF. Signed-off-by: Trishank Karthik Kuppusamy <[email protected]>
trishankatdatadog
force-pushed
the
patch-2
branch
from
edde535 to
11f32cb
Compare
Done |
Could not find VMware or DigitalOcean adoption anymore. Please double-check.