https://hub.docker.com/_/fedora/
This seems like a big loss, especially for getting folks to test Fedora 24.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:43:26PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
https://hub.docker.com/_/fedora/ This seems like a big loss, especially for getting folks to test Fedora 24.
Previously, it's been uploaded on release day. I can see an argument for adding a "devel" tag too.
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:43:26PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
https://hub.docker.com/_/fedora/ This seems like a big loss, especially for getting folks to test Fedora 24.
Previously, it's been uploaded on release day. I can see an argument for adding a "devel" tag too.
We have rawhide, but normally don't do pre-release branched. Is there a desire to do so?
-AdamM
-- Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 06/22/2016 08:35 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:43:26PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
https://hub.docker.com/_/fedora/ This seems like a big loss, especially for getting folks to test Fedora 24.
Previously, it's been uploaded on release day. I can see an argument for adding a "devel" tag too.
We have rawhide, but normally don't do pre-release branched. Is there a desire to do so?
-AdamM
I could definitely see value in having these images be more accessible. We could even make it be a different name than `fedora` so that people know they are using something that is pre-release.
`fedora24prerelease` with tags of date timestamps and `latest` follows latest prerelease.
I don't know how hard this is to achieve, just describing ideal scenarios.
Dusty
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
I could definitely see value in having these images be more accessible. We could even make it be a different name than `fedora` so that people know they are using something that is pre-release.
`fedora24prerelease` with tags of date timestamps and `latest` follows latest prerelease.
I don't know how hard this is to achieve, just describing ideal scenarios.
tl;dr - I'm going to suggest we add a 'next' tag for the upcoming releases if that's feasible.
Anybody know how other projects handle this? What's the most useful flow for people building on our container images?
* Alpine has tags for 3.1 -> 3.4 (also "latest") and then "edge" * Debian has 8.5, 8, jessie, latest and then oldstable, sid, stretch, testing, unstable... * Ubuntu, afaik, doesn't have any pre-release images. They have 16.04, 15.10, 14.04, etc. (also with their release names, xenial, wily, trusty, etc.)
My thought is we'd want all current versions still receiving updates, plus rawhide, plus the upcoming release. My suggestion would be to add a tag for "next" that is the upcoming Fedora release.
Thoughts, comments, flames?
Best,
jzb
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Joe Brockmeier jzb@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
I could definitely see value in having these images be more accessible. We could even make it be a different name than `fedora` so that people know they are using something that is pre-release.
`fedora24prerelease` with tags of date timestamps and `latest` follows latest prerelease.
I don't know how hard this is to achieve, just describing ideal scenarios.
tl;dr - I'm going to suggest we add a 'next' tag for the upcoming releases if that's feasible.
Anybody know how other projects handle this? What's the most useful flow for people building on our container images?
- Alpine has tags for 3.1 -> 3.4 (also "latest") and then "edge"
- Debian has 8.5, 8, jessie, latest and then oldstable, sid, stretch,
testing, unstable...
- Ubuntu, afaik, doesn't have any pre-release images. They have 16.04,
15.10, 14.04, etc. (also with their release names, xenial, wily, trusty, etc.)
My thought is we'd want all current versions still receiving updates, plus rawhide, plus the upcoming release. My suggestion would be to add a tag for "next" that is the upcoming Fedora release.
Thoughts, comments, flames?
My main concern is that we would then introduce a concept of "next" that isn't well defined within the Release Engineering vocabulary or the Fedora Project at large as any sort of milestone deliverable. (Where as in debian land "stable", "testing", and "unstable"/"sid" are well defined streams of code/content).
What we could do is release Fedora N+1 at Alpha, Beta, and Final times and tag is as N-alpha, N-beta, and then finally just N (and latest).
Example:
Fedora 24 is current stable -> docker image:tag fedora:24 and fedora:latest point to this.
Fedora 25 Alpha is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-alpha to the Hub
Fedora 25 Beta is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-beta to the Hub (removing fedora:25-alpha tag)
Fedora 25 GA is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25 (removing the fedora:25-beta tag and update fedora:latest to point to fedora:25)
Fedora Rawhide continues rolling along as it does fedora:rawhide (we tend to update this roughly once a month right now)
Thoughts?
Also, as an aside. Whatever we decide should be brought up with Fedora RelEng as a meeting ticket to make sure the proposal is workable from a release perspective (though I suspect it will be and will volunteer to take that on). I'll also volunteer write up a SOP doc for Fedora RelEng Documentation so that this information persists and is well defined if there's future questions about it.
-AdamM
Best,
jzb
Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS jzb@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/ _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:28:32AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
My main concern is that we would then introduce a concept of "next" that isn't well defined within the Release Engineering vocabulary or the Fedora Project at large as any sort of milestone deliverable. (Where as in debian land "stable", "testing", and "unstable"/"sid" are well defined streams of code/content).
What we could do is release Fedora N+1 at Alpha, Beta, and Final times and tag is as N-alpha, N-beta, and then finally just N (and latest).
Example:
Fedora 24 is current stable -> docker image:tag fedora:24 and fedora:latest point to this.
Fedora 25 Alpha is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-alpha to the Hub
Fedora 25 Beta is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-beta to the Hub (removing fedora:25-alpha tag)
Fedora 25 GA is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25 (removing the fedora:25-beta tag and update fedora:latest to point to fedora:25)
Fedora Rawhide continues rolling along as it does fedora:rawhide (we tend to update this roughly once a month right now)
Thoughts?
Having easy way to get the next release container after Alpha and not just rawhide (which is next next by that time) would definitely be appreciated. Having the name reasonably stable for a couple of weeks would be a nice benefit, especially for automated testing. Therefore, fedora:25-alpha, fedora:25-beta would be really good.
I just don't like the proposal of removing fedora:25-alpha the moment fedora:25-beta is released -- there might be a need to debug some regression and easy way to get Alpha even after Beta is out might be useful. I'd propose to remove all pre-release tags one month after the GA (fedora:25 in this example) has been made available.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:47 AM, Jan Pazdziora jpazdziora@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:28:32AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
My main concern is that we would then introduce a concept of "next" that isn't well defined within the Release Engineering vocabulary or the Fedora Project at large as any sort of milestone deliverable. (Where as in debian land "stable", "testing", and "unstable"/"sid" are well defined streams of code/content).
What we could do is release Fedora N+1 at Alpha, Beta, and Final times and tag is as N-alpha, N-beta, and then finally just N (and latest).
Example:
Fedora 24 is current stable -> docker image:tag fedora:24 and fedora:latest point to this.
Fedora 25 Alpha is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-alpha to the Hub
Fedora 25 Beta is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-beta to the Hub (removing fedora:25-alpha tag)
Fedora 25 GA is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25 (removing the fedora:25-beta tag and update fedora:latest to point to fedora:25)
Fedora Rawhide continues rolling along as it does fedora:rawhide (we tend to update this roughly once a month right now)
Thoughts?
Having easy way to get the next release container after Alpha and not just rawhide (which is next next by that time) would definitely be appreciated. Having the name reasonably stable for a couple of weeks would be a nice benefit, especially for automated testing. Therefore, fedora:25-alpha, fedora:25-beta would be really good.
I just don't like the proposal of removing fedora:25-alpha the moment fedora:25-beta is released -- there might be a need to debug some regression and easy way to get Alpha even after Beta is out might be useful. I'd propose to remove all pre-release tags one month after the GA (fedora:25 in this example) has been made available.
+1 - Removing pre-release tags when GA becomes available, I think that makes sense.
-AdamM
-- Jan Pazdziora Senior Principal Software Engineer, Identity Management Engineering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
My main concern is that we would then introduce a concept of "next" that isn't well defined within the Release Engineering vocabulary or the Fedora Project at large as any sort of milestone deliverable. (Where as in debian land "stable", "testing", and "unstable"/"sid" are well defined streams of code/content).
What we could do is release Fedora N+1 at Alpha, Beta, and Final times and tag is as N-alpha, N-beta, and then finally just N (and latest).
Example:
Fedora 24 is current stable -> docker image:tag fedora:24 and fedora:latest point to this.
Fedora 25 Alpha is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-alpha to the Hub
Fedora 25 Beta is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-beta to the Hub (removing fedora:25-alpha tag)
Fedora 25 GA is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25 (removing the fedora:25-beta tag and update fedora:latest to point to fedora:25)
Fedora Rawhide continues rolling along as it does fedora:rawhide (we tend to update this roughly once a month right now)
Thoughts?
So this fits with our engineering processes, I guess, but I'm considering the end consumer.
If I'm building images and just want to test with "the next release of Fedora" I don't know I want to be fiddling with the tags continually. Especially if I'm doing some kind of workflow with CI/CD and just checking "did something break"? This feels like a lot of manual fiddling required. We'll also wind up with a LOT of tags on Docker Hub (can we delete those?).
I'm mostly hypothesizing, though - I would be interested in hearing from people consuming the images.
Also, as an aside. Whatever we decide should be brought up with Fedora RelEng as a meeting ticket to make sure the proposal is workable from a release perspective (though I suspect it will be and will volunteer to take that on). I'll also volunteer write up a SOP doc for Fedora RelEng Documentation so that this information persists and is well defined if there's future questions about it.
+1
Best,
jzb
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Joe Brockmeier jzb@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
My main concern is that we would then introduce a concept of "next" that isn't well defined within the Release Engineering vocabulary or the Fedora Project at large as any sort of milestone deliverable. (Where as in debian land "stable", "testing", and "unstable"/"sid" are well defined streams of code/content).
What we could do is release Fedora N+1 at Alpha, Beta, and Final times and tag is as N-alpha, N-beta, and then finally just N (and latest).
Example:
Fedora 24 is current stable -> docker image:tag fedora:24 and fedora:latest point to this.
Fedora 25 Alpha is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-alpha to the Hub
Fedora 25 Beta is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25-beta to the Hub (removing fedora:25-alpha tag)
Fedora 25 GA is released -> push docker image:tag fedora:25 (removing the fedora:25-beta tag and update fedora:latest to point to fedora:25)
Fedora Rawhide continues rolling along as it does fedora:rawhide (we tend to update this roughly once a month right now)
Thoughts?
So this fits with our engineering processes, I guess, but I'm considering the end consumer.
If I'm building images and just want to test with "the next release of Fedora" I don't know I want to be fiddling with the tags continually. Especially if I'm doing some kind of workflow with CI/CD and just checking "did something break"? This feels like a lot of manual fiddling required. We'll also wind up with a LOT of tags on Docker Hub (can we delete those?).
I think we can delete them for the base images. I'm not sure about for layered images.
I can see the end user desire for a moving target to test things against. This is something we're going to have to fix for Atomic Two-Week Release soon-ish also.
Following the moving target idea of a "next" tag, would "next" then point to Rawhide when we're in the limbo period of "post GA, pre Branched" ?
-AdamM
I'm mostly hypothesizing, though - I would be interested in hearing from people consuming the images.
Also, as an aside. Whatever we decide should be brought up with Fedora RelEng as a meeting ticket to make sure the proposal is workable from a release perspective (though I suspect it will be and will volunteer to take that on). I'll also volunteer write up a SOP doc for Fedora RelEng Documentation so that this information persists and is well defined if there's future questions about it.
+1
Best,
jzb
-- Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS jzb@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/ _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Following the moving target idea of a "next" tag, would "next" then point to Rawhide when we're in the limbo period of "post GA, pre Branched" ?
I think so, yes?
And again - I'm just trying to think through this as a potential consumer, so folks doing work with the images in this fashion please chime in. Or if I propose something insanely complicated for rel-eng.
Best,
jzb
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Joe Brockmeier jzb@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Following the moving target idea of a "next" tag, would "next" then point to Rawhide when we're in the limbo period of "post GA, pre Branched" ?
I think so, yes?
And again - I'm just trying to think through this as a potential consumer, so folks doing work with the images in this fashion please chime in. Or if I propose something insanely complicated for rel-eng.
Oh no, I don't think the proposal is going to be problematic. I just wanted to write it all out so that I understand it fully and don't make any incorrect assumptions.
-AdamM
Best,
jzb
-- Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS jzb@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/ _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 14/06/16, Josh Berkus wrote:
https://hub.docker.com/_/fedora/
This seems like a big loss, especially for getting folks to test Fedora 24.
We push there only after GA. You can see the latest nightly build at [1].
[1] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/latest-Fedora-/compose/D...
Kushal