Definition of word "ring"
hhorak at redhat.com
Mon Apr 20 13:56:53 UTC 2015
On 04/20/2015 12:51 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Hi folks,
>> who are part of Env&Stack group.
>> Today in the morning I discussed with Honza Horak a bit about rings
>> and I think that the word ring should be defined.
>> Can anyone describe what word "ring" means?
>> If we have another words which should be described I would be glad to
>> mention it.
> To me, "ring" is a set of artifacts. Artifacts can be (repositories of) RPMs, Python packages, Ruby Gems, and similar packages. Artifacts can also be Docker images, Vagrant boxes and similar.
I'd just add that the set is described by expectations we have about
this set, so for example we can have:
* stable libraries, that we don't expect breaking API/ABI but we expect
them to be available for any upper ring -- those will be probably in ring 1
* set of RPMs in ring 2 -- e.g. framework like Ruby on Rails, that makes
sense to be available in more versions, but is not necessary for most of
the other packages
* another set of RPMs in ring 3 that don't follow all packaging
guidelines -- e.g. application built in copr
In other words -- when looking at which ring the artifact belongs to, we
must look at what we expect from that artifact.
> Hope this helps,
>> Petr Hracek
>> Software Engineer
>> Developer Experience
>> Red Hat, Inc
>> Mob: +420777056169
>> email: phracek at redhat.com
> env-and-stacks mailing list
> env-and-stacks at lists.fedoraproject.org
More information about the env-and-stacks