[shykes]

Yes it's a fair observation. In terms of use cases, we did focus exclusively on CI/CD, and only recently expanded our marketing to other use cases like AI agents. It's understandable that this expansion can be surprising, we're trying to explain it as clearly as possible, it's a work in progress.

I just wanted to clarify that in terms of product design and engineering, there is unwavering focus and continuity. Everything we build is carefully designed to fit with the rest. We are emphatically not throwing unrelated products at the wall to see what sticks.

For example, I saw your comment elsewhere about the LLM type not belonging in the core. That's a legitimate concern that we debated ourselves. In the end we think there is a good design reason to make it core; we may be wrong, but the point is that we take those kinds of design decisions seriously and we take all use cases into account when we make them.

[oulipo]

Why not just using "Dagger is a modern compositional framework, with applications from CI/CD to AI agents", so people understand perhaps better that it's meant as a "framework" rather than a "tool" for a specific use-case?

[shykes]

Yes, this is what we're going for. At the moment the website says "cross-platform composition engine". But elsewhere in this thread, someone complained that it's too vague. It's hard to find a good balance between "too specific" and "too general".