Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora Container Release

Thanks for the note Clement. Inline...

On Mar 19, 2018 4:31 PM, "Colin Walters" <walters verbum org> wrote:

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018, at 3:38 PM, Clement Verna wrote:

> So if you maintain a container could you please build your container
> against the f28 and master branch.

There's a fairly important deeper question here: Do we really
want to build all of these containers against each fedora release?

Does anyone *care* what underlying base image is used for e.g.
waiverdb?

I understand that we're sort of doing this just because that's
what we do with RPMs...but is that the right thing?

It feels like for most containers we should really only ship
them based on the current "stable" fedora?

I can imagine it being useful to build the containers just
so we can test them for the future when the N+1 becomes the "stable" N,
but I'm not sure if we'd really want to highlight them much?

Also I simply do not understand why we're requiring a human to
initiate builds.

Agreed! Containers are about the functionality provided, not so much the underlying OS image in use. Granted, we want secure and minimal images, but having a f28 image and f2X images for something seems to just add more burden on maintainers. I feel having updated images with applied security fixes and/or new primary use case functionality updates are preferable over having many builds on different OS releases. As a container user I have no problem running an image built on f28 with, say, f26.

I thought we had automation already for building. It was noted as a problem in a pagure issue somewhere and I thought it was resolved.

--
Thanks,
Steve Milner

Atomic | Red Hat | http://projectatomic.io/