Great to see CoreOS launching a supported version of their stack with a push to make Kubernetes easier to consume in the enterprise.
IMHO, one should always consider if being opinionated about the fundamentals of a platform is good thing when most enterprises will want to chose their own fundamentals.
This is something that all companies that set out to build great products have to figure out. Do you take the Apple path and attempt to build the best product possible, even if that means limiting where and what it runs on?
While we try to answer that question, I'm pleased that CoreOS has taken great effort to keep our opensource projects[0] separate from our commercial offerings[1]. This allows the community, and even our competitors, to support the "chose your own fundamentals" use case. Tectonic simply represents the CoreOS fundamentals, which we believe encapsulates the right patterns that will lead a large group of people to success.
> IMHO, one should always consider if being opinionated about the fundamentals of a platform is good thing when most enterprises will want to chose their own fundamentals.
I work for Pivotal in Pivotal Labs, until recently I was on secondment to Cloud Foundry, an opensource PaaS.
We have expressed opinions all over the place; Cloud Foundry is full of Pivotal Labs DNA.
With rare exceptions, the advantages of having a complete PaaS are just too damn good to pass up. It turns out that customers don't necessarily want a particular configuration -- they want the absence of difficulty.
In that situation, one-size-adapts-to-all is very, very attractive.
IMHO, one should always consider if being opinionated about the fundamentals of a platform is good thing when most enterprises will want to chose their own fundamentals.