My primary concern is mind-share and "precedent eventually leads to practice". If all the images and examples presented say :
' FROM: alpine ' We've lost the hearts and minds of developers, and we are no longer a part of the conversation. On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Derek Carr <dec...@redhat.com> wrote: > I am sympathetic to Tim Hockin's perspective. I am not sure where the > size versus value equation tips, but if I go to a restaurant for an > appetizer and the menu only shows entrees I can see where folks like Tim > come from with their request. It's hard to argue with someone that they > should eat more, and it seems like there is a community of folks that want > smaller base images. > > I think a lot of the users in Golang ecosystem want small base images > because the binaries that they build ironically end up kind of large! > > I am working on pod eviction in Kubernetes now when a node is low on > disk. I could see some deployment models that charged image usage to the > pod rather than choosing to treat shared image layers as a cost to the > underlying infra even if we are not doing that yet in this first > iteration. For those cases, users may think they should care more than > operators want or need them to care about the image size. > > On Wednesday, June 15, 2016, Tim St. Clair <tstcl...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Can we finally address this image size issue? >> >> >> https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!msg/kubernetes-dev/zGMa4QkC_QE/gR43SztlBwAJ >> >> I've sent emails about it in the past, and adoption is moving fast. >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Timothy St. Clair >> tstcl...@redhat.com >> > -- Cheers, Timothy St. Clair tstcl...@redhat.com
