On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 01:00:32PM +0000, James Hogarth wrote:
I see that we just need a Dockerfile in dist-git and fedpkg
container-build can work from the existing git repo but is this
intended to be supported or do we need to provide a fresh review
request and then only build from the dist-git docker namespace, rather
than rpm?
Ooh. That's probably an oversight. The intention is for these to be in
the new namespace.
Where there is no existing lower layer that would be useful (eg
httpd+mod_php+mod_ssl) is it permitted to have a container that
installs httpd, mod_php and mod_ssl for a PHP based application?
We're still working this out. For now, I think it's a judgement call,
and we can figure out how we want to standardize from there. If
something seems really basic and doesn't exist yet (like httpd +
mod_ssl), it's probably good to work on creating that as an underlying
layer, since it'll be so useful to so many other things.
What is considered acceptable for volumes specified in the
dockerfile?
Anywhere data or config is expected?
How should we provide instructions on how to run the container?
Just a readme.md in dist-git? Actually include something in the container?
These are all great questions. :)
Is an entrypoint of ["/sbin/init"] permitted to make use of
systemd
for handling zombies and service unit files?
This of course would then limit the container to docker hosts that
have oci-systemd-hook to work properly if so, but massively simplifies
things for services.
I think it _should_ be permitted, but we need metadata and naming
standards to make it clear.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader