On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Adam Miller <maxamillion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello all, > In the Fedora 24 timeframe the Fedora Release Engineering group is > aiming to deliver the Layered Image Build Service[0] to allow Fedora > contributors to build containers images. In the first iteration of > this we're targeting Docker layered image support. Part of this will > be to allow Fedora contributors to maintain Dockerfiles much like we > maintain rpm spec files via DistGit. > > However we need to make a couple of decisions about naming conventions > such that we can distinguish between rpms and container images as they > are stored in Fedora DistGit. Also, alternatively we could setup a > completely separate DistGit for container images that is disjoint from > the one used for rpms. I would love feedback on everyone's preferences > between those two options. > > If we were to go with the former rather than the latter, we would need > to find a way to "namespace" container images so they can be > determined as different. I've thought about this a lot and I worry > about defining a namespace by some alphanumberic sequence because I > just know that at some point there will end up being a piece of > software in the ecosystem that we want to package as a rpm that will > share this pattern and result in problematic filtering. We could > accept that risk and simply say "this sequence is a reserved word" or > use a special character as the leading character in a DistGit > repository name to signify that it is a container. A special character > is the option I propose. > > Proposal: > In the event that container images (Dockerfiles for now, others in > the future) and rpm spec files are to share the DistGit repositories, > the container images leading character would be a special character. > The decision upon which special character is open to the community at > large to decide but certain ones impose obvious limitations for shell > quoting and the like. For the sake of example I will use the special > character '-' as my marker for a container image DistGit repository. > Also in the example I'm going to use the cockpit-project[1] as it is > already something that is packaged as an rpm[2] in Fedora and > delivered as a container image[3] built from it's Fedora rpm set. > > Example: > Cockpit's rpm spec repo in DistGit would be stored as it is today: > fedpkg clone cockpit > > Cockpit's Dockerfile repo in DistGit would be stored with a > leading special character: > fedpkg clone -cockpit > > Here, the leading '-' signifies that it is the container image > DistGit repository which would make it an illegal name for an rpm by > the N-V-R convention. > > The technical details of this are all open to change so feel free to > tell me I'm crazy and present a new idea and I'm happy to pursue it. How much collaboration do we expect around the dockerfiles? I would think significantly more than an RPM spec file. With an RPM, there are only a handful of ways to build the software and adding patches isn't a high-frequency/multi-maintainer event (usually). If we expect dockerfiles to be more dynamic, then I would prefer a separate git instance. Then we don't have to worry about collisions and hacks. We can also set up a separate set of ACLs around who is allow to commit to them, etc. josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
