You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Essay proposal pull-request: #1023
Essay submission pull-request: Sent me shared google doc Draft essay
Note: This feedback is on a very drafty Essay. Therefore, the feedback I give is on the content of drafted essay.
General:
• Topic: The topic is good and compared tools are relevant to environment.
• Title: The title is Ok, but I think it can be more explicit, like “Comparing Kubernetes and Nomad Orchestration tools”. So, it will be nice if the content of the essay is closely related to the title.
• Structure: The structure is ok, but can be improved. I suggest to have main sections and subsections with good numbering. Also, it will be nice to include introductory statement for each of the “main” sections.
• Linguistics: Generally, the linguistics is good, but can be improved to increase the reading flow, by having a connection statement between paragraphs and sentences to introduce the next section or thing you want to write.
• Figures: The looks ok, but needs improvement in the image quality for visualization. One has to zoom in to see details of the figure in figure 2, 3a, 3b and 4. Also, the second figure is missing description and number.
I suggest you put a description under each figure in 3a and 3b to help the reader to easily differentiate the difference between both of them.
• Format: The format needs to be improved to look appealing.
Abstract:
No Abstract yet. I think it will be nice to have a good abstract that summarizes the whole essay.
Introduction:
No Introduction Section. I think is a good idea to have introduction section that briefly describes what the topic is generally about and why you choose to compare Kubernetes and Nomad You can also introduce the rest of the sections in the paper to prepare the reader on what to expect.
Background:
• Generally, this section is very informative. It contains enough information to make the reader understand the background of the work. However, I think it can be shortened down and use some parts of it for the introduction and Comparison sections.
• From the tone and content of the section, “what is container orchestration?” I think it can be reformulated to make part of the introductory section.
• The statement “Containers contribute to making the development, testing and production consistent, shown in Figure 1”, can be rephrased to suit the figure description. It can be rephrased to "In DevOps life cycle as shown in figure 1, containers contribute to make the development lifecycle consistent.
• It will also be nice to move some parts of the “Architecture” and “Scheduling” to the comparison section and make you comparison based on that.
Comparison:
• This section is not fully developed. The content of this section is very small, considering that it is the main section of the work, I think it should have more contents about things or features you want to compare.
• I will suggest moving some of the “Architecture” and the “Scheduling” parts in the background section to this comparison section, if you are comparing base on the architecture and scheduling. Then make your comparison based on the features.
Conclusion:
No concluding part yet. Remember to add this section and try to give a concluding statement based on what you have compared.
Reference:
I like fact that there are a lot of references and they are clickable. However, it might be too much, considering the limitation of no of words for this Essay.
If footnotes are included in word count it might be too much. So, put all references in a reference section and remember to use the proper referencing format.
e2ed108There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Feedback on essay draft #1023
Feedback by Ifeoma Urama
Member
Ifeoma Urama @IfyUrama email urama@kth.se
Essay proposal pull-request: #1023
Essay submission pull-request: Sent me shared google doc Draft essay
Note: This feedback is on a very drafty Essay. Therefore, the feedback I give is on the content of drafted essay.
General:
• Topic: The topic is good and compared tools are relevant to environment.
• Title: The title is Ok, but I think it can be more explicit, like “Comparing Kubernetes and Nomad Orchestration tools”. So, it will be nice if the content of the essay is closely related to the title.
• Structure: The structure is ok, but can be improved. I suggest to have main sections and subsections with good numbering. Also, it will be nice to include introductory statement for each of the “main” sections.
• Linguistics: Generally, the linguistics is good, but can be improved to increase the reading flow, by having a connection statement between paragraphs and sentences to introduce the next section or thing you want to write.
• Figures: The looks ok, but needs improvement in the image quality for visualization. One has to zoom in to see details of the figure in figure 2, 3a, 3b and 4. Also, the second figure is missing description and number.
I suggest you put a description under each figure in 3a and 3b to help the reader to easily differentiate the difference between both of them.
• Format: The format needs to be improved to look appealing.
Abstract:
No Abstract yet. I think it will be nice to have a good abstract that summarizes the whole essay.
Introduction:
No Introduction Section. I think is a good idea to have introduction section that briefly describes what the topic is generally about and why you choose to compare Kubernetes and Nomad You can also introduce the rest of the sections in the paper to prepare the reader on what to expect.
Background:
• Generally, this section is very informative. It contains enough information to make the reader understand the background of the work. However, I think it can be shortened down and use some parts of it for the introduction and Comparison sections.
• From the tone and content of the section, “what is container orchestration?” I think it can be reformulated to make part of the introductory section.
• The statement “Containers contribute to making the development, testing and production consistent, shown in Figure 1”, can be rephrased to suit the figure description. It can be rephrased to "In DevOps life cycle as shown in figure 1, containers contribute to make the development lifecycle consistent.
• It will also be nice to move some parts of the “Architecture” and “Scheduling” to the comparison section and make you comparison based on that.
Comparison:
• This section is not fully developed. The content of this section is very small, considering that it is the main section of the work, I think it should have more contents about things or features you want to compare.
• I will suggest moving some of the “Architecture” and the “Scheduling” parts in the background section to this comparison section, if you are comparing base on the architecture and scheduling. Then make your comparison based on the features.
Conclusion:
No concluding part yet. Remember to add this section and try to give a concluding statement based on what you have compared.
Reference:
I like fact that there are a lot of references and they are clickable. However, it might be too much, considering the limitation of no of words for this Essay.
If footnotes are included in word count it might be too much. So, put all references in a reference section and remember to use the proper referencing format.