Hello all, Now that we have approved FESCo Docker Image Guidlines[0] and we're really close to having the Docker Layered Image Build System in place (everything works, just a couple items to get in Ansible and more testing before going to PROD), it's time to cross off final items for bringing Docker Layered Images to Fedora. One of the these items is to create a Bugzilla Component for Docker items much in the same way that we have components for RPMs. I'm sure there will be something needed for pkgdb but I don't know what specifically. I know that pkgdb does already have support for the docker namespace (as does fedpkg) so I'm hoping that the amount of work needed isn't too bad.
I'm unsure of exactly what all needs to be done and I hope that I haven't confused the issue because I might not be up on the Bugzilla vocabulary. I'm mostly looking for advisement on what the next steps should be, what all needs to be done and where I can help in making those things happen.
Thank you, -AdamM
On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:12:38 -0500 Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hello all, Now that we have approved FESCo Docker Image Guidlines[0] and we're really close to having the Docker Layered Image Build System in place (everything works, just a couple items to get in Ansible and more testing before going to PROD), it's time to cross off final items for bringing Docker Layered Images to Fedora. One of the these items is to create a Bugzilla Component for Docker items much in the same way that we have components for RPMs. I'm sure there will be something needed for pkgdb but I don't know what specifically. I know that pkgdb does already have support for the docker namespace (as does fedpkg) so I'm hoping that the amount of work needed isn't too bad.
I'm unsure of exactly what all needs to be done and I hope that I haven't confused the issue because I might not be up on the Bugzilla vocabulary. I'm mostly looking for advisement on what the next steps should be, what all needs to be done and where I can help in making those things happen.
Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product. ie, at this level:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?classification=Fedora
and then pkgdb will need to create components under that for each docker image along with who should be point of contact and who cc'ed, etc.
Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product?
kevin
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 17:12:38 -0500 Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hello all, Now that we have approved FESCo Docker Image Guidlines[0] and we're really close to having the Docker Layered Image Build System in place (everything works, just a couple items to get in Ansible and more testing before going to PROD), it's time to cross off final items for bringing Docker Layered Images to Fedora. One of the these items is to create a Bugzilla Component for Docker items much in the same way that we have components for RPMs. I'm sure there will be something needed for pkgdb but I don't know what specifically. I know that pkgdb does already have support for the docker namespace (as does fedpkg) so I'm hoping that the amount of work needed isn't too bad.
I'm unsure of exactly what all needs to be done and I hope that I haven't confused the issue because I might not be up on the Bugzilla vocabulary. I'm mostly looking for advisement on what the next steps should be, what all needs to be done and where I can help in making those things happen.
Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product. ie, at this level:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?classification=Fedora
and then pkgdb will need to create components under that for each docker image along with who should be point of contact and who cc'ed, etc.
Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product?
I'm honestly not sure, I'd like to get mattdm and/or the Council to chime in on that. I'm definitely not the right person for selecting the color of the bike shed.
-AdamM
kevin
infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@lists.fedoraproje...
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:32:39AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product. ie, at this level: Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product?
I'm honestly not sure, I'd like to get mattdm and/or the Council to chime in on that. I'm definitely not the right person for selecting the color of the bike shed.
I was first thinking "Fedora Docker Layered Images" — it's longish but accurately descriptive. But then I thought: actually, we don't have a clear bug-reporting home for _base_ images (other than pagure for the fedora-kickstarts). So, if it isn't too ugly to overload the namespace just a little bit, we could just do "Fedora Docker Images".
What do you all think?
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:32:39AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product. ie, at this level: Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product?
I'm honestly not sure, I'd like to get mattdm and/or the Council to chime in on that. I'm definitely not the right person for selecting the color of the bike shed.
I was first thinking "Fedora Docker Layered Images" — it's longish but accurately descriptive. But then I thought: actually, we don't have a clear bug-reporting home for _base_ images (other than pagure for the fedora-kickstarts). So, if it isn't too ugly to overload the namespace just a little bit, we could just do "Fedora Docker Images".
What do you all think?
+1
-AdamM
-- Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@lists.fedoraproje...
On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:28:43 -0400 Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:32:39AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product. ie, at this level: Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product?
I'm honestly not sure, I'd like to get mattdm and/or the Council to chime in on that. I'm definitely not the right person for selecting the color of the bike shed.
I was first thinking "Fedora Docker Layered Images" — it's longish but accurately descriptive. But then I thought: actually, we don't have a clear bug-reporting home for _base_ images (other than pagure for the fedora-kickstarts). So, if it isn't too ugly to overload the namespace just a little bit, we could just do "Fedora Docker Images".
What do you all think?
Sure, works for me.
kevin
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:28:43 -0400 Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:32:39AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product. ie, at this level: Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product?
I'm honestly not sure, I'd like to get mattdm and/or the Council to chime in on that. I'm definitely not the right person for selecting the color of the bike shed.
I was first thinking "Fedora Docker Layered Images" — it's longish but accurately descriptive. But then I thought: actually, we don't have a clear bug-reporting home for _base_ images (other than pagure for the fedora-kickstarts). So, if it isn't too ugly to overload the namespace just a little bit, we could just do "Fedora Docker Images".
What do you all think?
Sure, works for me.
Where do we need to submit the request for the new component to be created in BZ?
-AdamM
kevin
infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@lists.fedoraproje...
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 14:27:27 -0500 Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:28:43 -0400 Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:32:39AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product. ie, at this level: Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product?
I'm honestly not sure, I'd like to get mattdm and/or the Council to chime in on that. I'm definitely not the right person for selecting the color of the bike shed.
I was first thinking "Fedora Docker Layered Images" — it's longish but accurately descriptive. But then I thought: actually, we don't have a clear bug-reporting home for _base_ images (other than pagure for the fedora-kickstarts). So, if it isn't too ugly to overload the namespace just a little bit, we could just do "Fedora Docker Images".
What do you all think?
Sure, works for me.
Where do we need to submit the request for the new component to be created in BZ?
Just an infrastructure ticket.
But we should also file the a pkgdb issue to update the bugzilla sync script for components in that namespace.
kevin
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Adam Miller -
Kevin Fenzi -
Matthew Miller