Re: [atomic-devel] ostree-docker-builder

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Clayton Coleman <ccoleman redhat com> wrote:

Ben, are there things we can do to make it easier for new builder
types (beyond custom)? Agree it's a lot of work.

undoubtedly, though i think the first question we need to answer is whether we want to make it easier to add more first class build types, or does it make more sense to make it easier to create custom builders (eg inject more fine-grained env variables that can be consumed, provide some sort of friendly "custom-base" image that provides useful functionality with plug points for customization, etc)

because adding new first class types is probably always going to require new code changes, even if we create a better abstraction layer and at the end of the day mostly all our existing 3 build types do is launch a container that knows how to do the rest of the build flow (sounds like a custom builder to me).

it's probably worth an R&D spike to decide which approach makes more sense, so i've created a card here. Let's continue the discussion there:
https://trello.com/c/5yzDjS0D/719-r-d-make-it-easier-to-add-new-build-types

This looks really clean Giuseppe - we should write it up as a blog
post for others to try, and add the image to the origin DockerHub
namespace. What limitations does it have?

> On Oct 7, 2015, at 11:00 AM, Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan redhat com> wrote:
>
> Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan redhat com> writes:
>
>> Should it be less invasive and perhaps use ostree-docker-builder through
>> the "Custom Builder Image" strategy instead?
>
> This is a custom docker builder that uses OSTree to create the
> container:
>
> https://github.com/giuseppe/ostree-custom-docker-builder/
>
> Regards,
> Giuseppe

Ben Parees | OpenShift