Becoming comaintainer for Fedora-Dockerfiles

[Bohuslav Kabrda]

----- Original Message -----
> 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.

Cool, this would really be a nice feature to have.

> > > 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?

I'm not sure :) In fact, I'm wondering whether it's really necessary to be shipping these as RPMs. Dockerfiles are good candidates for shipping via RPMs, since they are the recipes used to build images that are actually out there (on dockerhub, etc). kubernetes/Nulecule examples, on the other hand, will be just *examples*, not something you would want to build, deploy and use as is.

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

-- 
Regards,
Slavek Kabrda