On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Adam Miller > <maxamillion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxx | http://community.redhat.com/ > Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/ > _______________________________________________ > cloud mailing list > cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
