On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 08:55:33AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
The main thing that concern I have is that with modularity there is
going to be a concept of "base runtime" which will have a
"generation"
associated with it (most likely, the "generation" will share a name
with the Fedora release number it was built from). Containers will be
built on top of the base runtime and depending on the modules
requirements, a module may select different generations of the base
runtime and since there's plans to distribute modules (at least
optionally) as containers, we'll likely need a way to distinguish
between "generations" of the base runtime upon which a container was
built.
*nod* I guess that makes the question mostly whether the generation is
something users need to fundamentally care about, or an insider detail.
Of course, that might not be something we need to worry about in the
event that the modularity metadata handles all the book keeping and
just maps the appropriate information to a specific docker image tag.
If that ends up being the case, I'd almost just say drop the first
httpd and make it
registry.fedoraproject.org/httpd:latest
I'd hate to make it top-level simply because modularity forgot to
handle this because we forgot to tell them...
Thoughts? Should we bring this to the modularity group for review?
Yes. Oh, for @-mentions in email. I'll find someone and bug them.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader