[DISCUSS] Artemis Docker Image

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] Artemis Docker Image

clebertsuconic
Sorry if I am being completely ignorant here. how can we deliver
official docker images?


Consider the following:

- How that plays on the release? it would be part of our normal
release? or should be done afterwards?
- I believe there's an apache entity.. but who handles authorization
to publish them?


There are a couple ones out there on the docker hub.. but i was
looking to have an official build.. signed by us.

--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis Docker Image

clebertsuconic
cough... cough... anyone have any ideas on how we can do that? :)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Clebert Suconic
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Sorry if I am being completely ignorant here. how can we deliver
> official docker images?
>
>
> Consider the following:
>
> - How that plays on the release? it would be part of our normal
> release? or should be done afterwards?
> - I believe there's an apache entity.. but who handles authorization
> to publish them?
>
>
> There are a couple ones out there on the docker hub.. but i was
> looking to have an official build.. signed by us.
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic



--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis Docker Image

artnaseef
I know how to create a docker image, and do so with a maven build.

And getting an image into a registry isn't too hard.  That's the "docker
push" command.  I suspect the docker-maven-plugin may be able to do that as
part of a build.

The part I don't know is how it can be published to a central docker
registry.  May be as simple as setting up an account on the central server.

As for making it part of the release - I think it would be great to have a
public docker image updated on every release.  However, I wouldn't want to
make it part of the main Artemis build (i.e. "mvn clean install" from the
activemq-artemis.git root) since the main deliverable from Apache projects
is the source, and requiring everyone who builds Artemis to have docker and
build the image seems like overkill.

Art



On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> cough... cough... anyone have any ideas on how we can do that? :)
>
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Clebert Suconic
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Sorry if I am being completely ignorant here. how can we deliver
> > official docker images?
> >
> >
> > Consider the following:
> >
> > - How that plays on the release? it would be part of our normal
> > release? or should be done afterwards?
> > - I believe there's an apache entity.. but who handles authorization
> > to publish them?
> >
> >
> > There are a couple ones out there on the docker hub.. but i was
> > looking to have an official build.. signed by us.
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis Docker Image

clebertsuconic
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Arthur Naseef <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I know how to create a docker image, and do so with a maven build.
>
> And getting an image into a registry isn't too hard.  That's the "docker
> push" command.  I suspect the docker-maven-plugin may be able to do that as
> part of a build.
>
> The part I don't know is how it can be published to a central docker
> registry.  May be as simple as setting up an account on the central server.


Yes.. that's the thing I'm wondering. I was wondering if there was an
apache account we could use. or if we would need to create an account
for activemq.

>
> As for making it part of the release - I think it would be great to have a
> public docker image updated on every release.  However, I wouldn't want to
> make it part of the main Artemis build (i.e. "mvn clean install" from the
> activemq-artemis.git root) since the main deliverable from Apache projects
> is the source, and requiring everyone who builds Artemis to have docker and
> build the image seems like overkill.


That's what I expected. I was just wondering if there was an apache
precedent on that. Docker becomes a binary distribution on that sense.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis Docker Image

vromero
I have been maintaining a docker image for quite a while:
https://hub.docker.com/r/vromero/activemq-artemis/ (> 100k pulls)
It does work, its fairly configurable, supports Ubuntu and Alpine (big deal
for the docker community) and I'm happy to make changes if anyone feels
there is area for improvement.

This said, we kinda already had this discussion, see thread I started back
in 11/7/16: *Contributing to the Apache Docker Account*.
But things were rather confusing regarding that Apache docker account back
then.

I was mostly talking to John D. Ament, that seemed pretty knowledgeable
about the account and about what was expected.
John if you are reading, perhaps you could let us know how things are right
now in that regard?



2018-03-01 11:20 GMT-08:00 Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>:

> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Arthur Naseef <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I know how to create a docker image, and do so with a maven build.
> >
> > And getting an image into a registry isn't too hard.  That's the "docker
> > push" command.  I suspect the docker-maven-plugin may be able to do that
> as
> > part of a build.
> >
> > The part I don't know is how it can be published to a central docker
> > registry.  May be as simple as setting up an account on the central
> server.
>
>
> Yes.. that's the thing I'm wondering. I was wondering if there was an
> apache account we could use. or if we would need to create an account
> for activemq.
>
> >
> > As for making it part of the release - I think it would be great to have
> a
> > public docker image updated on every release.  However, I wouldn't want
> to
> > make it part of the main Artemis build (i.e. "mvn clean install" from the
> > activemq-artemis.git root) since the main deliverable from Apache
> projects
> > is the source, and requiring everyone who builds Artemis to have docker
> and
> > build the image seems like overkill.
>
>
> That's what I expected. I was just wondering if there was an apache
> precedent on that. Docker becomes a binary distribution on that sense.
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis Docker Image

clebertsuconic
It would be nice to have a direction from Apache Foundation on Containers.

I will reach to infra tomorrow or the day after (since I planned to do
an Artemis release tomorrow)

@Victor: It would be nice to make your work official here... would
appreciate any help if we can move this forward.

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:17 AM, Victor <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have been maintaining a docker image for quite a while:
> https://hub.docker.com/r/vromero/activemq-artemis/ (> 100k pulls)
> It does work, its fairly configurable, supports Ubuntu and Alpine (big deal
> for the docker community) and I'm happy to make changes if anyone feels
> there is area for improvement.
>
> This said, we kinda already had this discussion, see thread I started back
> in 11/7/16: *Contributing to the Apache Docker Account*.
> But things were rather confusing regarding that Apache docker account back
> then.
>
> I was mostly talking to John D. Ament, that seemed pretty knowledgeable
> about the account and about what was expected.
> John if you are reading, perhaps you could let us know how things are right
> now in that regard?
>
>
>
> 2018-03-01 11:20 GMT-08:00 Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Arthur Naseef <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > I know how to create a docker image, and do so with a maven build.
>> >
>> > And getting an image into a registry isn't too hard.  That's the "docker
>> > push" command.  I suspect the docker-maven-plugin may be able to do that
>> as
>> > part of a build.
>> >
>> > The part I don't know is how it can be published to a central docker
>> > registry.  May be as simple as setting up an account on the central
>> server.
>>
>>
>> Yes.. that's the thing I'm wondering. I was wondering if there was an
>> apache account we could use. or if we would need to create an account
>> for activemq.
>>
>> >
>> > As for making it part of the release - I think it would be great to have
>> a
>> > public docker image updated on every release.  However, I wouldn't want
>> to
>> > make it part of the main Artemis build (i.e. "mvn clean install" from the
>> > activemq-artemis.git root) since the main deliverable from Apache
>> projects
>> > is the source, and requiring everyone who builds Artemis to have docker
>> and
>> > build the image seems like overkill.
>>
>>
>> That's what I expected. I was just wondering if there was an apache
>> precedent on that. Docker becomes a binary distribution on that sense.
>>



--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Artemis Docker Image

vromero
>@Victor: It would be nice to make your work official here... would
>appreciate any help if we can move this forward.

I'm in for contributing as it is or to many any changes necessary.
I'm engage in the discussion too, last time most of the problem was
figuring out the details and a build process that make sense for the docker
ecosystem.




2018-03-06 18:01 GMT-08:00 Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>:

> It would be nice to have a direction from Apache Foundation on Containers.
>
> I will reach to infra tomorrow or the day after (since I planned to do
> an Artemis release tomorrow)
>
> @Victor: It would be nice to make your work official here... would
> appreciate any help if we can move this forward.
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:17 AM, Victor <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I have been maintaining a docker image for quite a while:
> > https://hub.docker.com/r/vromero/activemq-artemis/ (> 100k pulls)
> > It does work, its fairly configurable, supports Ubuntu and Alpine (big
> deal
> > for the docker community) and I'm happy to make changes if anyone feels
> > there is area for improvement.
> >
> > This said, we kinda already had this discussion, see thread I started
> back
> > in 11/7/16: *Contributing to the Apache Docker Account*.
> > But things were rather confusing regarding that Apache docker account
> back
> > then.
> >
> > I was mostly talking to John D. Ament, that seemed pretty knowledgeable
> > about the account and about what was expected.
> > John if you are reading, perhaps you could let us know how things are
> right
> > now in that regard?
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-03-01 11:20 GMT-08:00 Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>:
> >
> >> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Arthur Naseef <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> > I know how to create a docker image, and do so with a maven build.
> >> >
> >> > And getting an image into a registry isn't too hard.  That's the
> "docker
> >> > push" command.  I suspect the docker-maven-plugin may be able to do
> that
> >> as
> >> > part of a build.
> >> >
> >> > The part I don't know is how it can be published to a central docker
> >> > registry.  May be as simple as setting up an account on the central
> >> server.
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes.. that's the thing I'm wondering. I was wondering if there was an
> >> apache account we could use. or if we would need to create an account
> >> for activemq.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > As for making it part of the release - I think it would be great to
> have
> >> a
> >> > public docker image updated on every release.  However, I wouldn't
> want
> >> to
> >> > make it part of the main Artemis build (i.e. "mvn clean install" from
> the
> >> > activemq-artemis.git root) since the main deliverable from Apache
> >> projects
> >> > is the source, and requiring everyone who builds Artemis to have
> docker
> >> and
> >> > build the image seems like overkill.
> >>
> >>
> >> That's what I expected. I was just wondering if there was an apache
> >> precedent on that. Docker becomes a binary distribution on that sense.
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>