Becoming comaintainer for Fedora-Dockerfiles

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 05:01:51AM -0400, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> Heh, it seems that my career as Fedora-Dockerfiles comaintainer may
> be rather short :) I think having a web frontend with pull requests
> for the new dist-git is an awesome idea. I'm +0.9 for pagure. The
> advantage is that it will be completely under Fedora control, the
> small downside is that potential contributors from outside Fedora
> will have to create Fedora account, which might scare some people
> off.

We want to make the web-pull-request process really easy for using
Pagure as a documentation tool, too, so support for
non-fedora-contributor drive-by contributions might come.


> So IIUC, the standard way to get dockerfiles from dist-git would be
> "fedpkg clone mariadb-docker" or similar. Perhaps we could provide a
> wrapper that anyone, even without Fedora account, like
> "fedora-get-dockerfile --list" or "fedora-get-dockerfile mariadb"
> (this would invoke "fedpkg clone --anonymous mariadb-docker").

Cool.

> > Maybe? Would it make sense for these to go together with the
> > dockerfiles they're associated with in a git repo at that level, or
> > would they be stand-alone and reference other repos? (Do you have
> > some concrete examples?)
> So I think that kubernetes/Nulecule examples should be standalone,
> since most often they'll reference multiple images. What I mean is
> that they would be a good fit for the current fedora-dockerfiles
> repo, but if we split the repo into multiple dist-git repos, they
> won't fit in any one of these.

So, would all of _those_ examples go into a single entity (package,
repo, whatever)? What should the distribution method for _these_ be?


-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader