On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:24 AM Scott McCarty <smcca...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Farkas, > Sorry for top posting. Your email is very long, but the short answer > to your question is Red Hat has two main strategies from a product > perspective: > > 1. Single Node -> RHEL -> Podman. The product installs on bare metal and > virtual machines. > and currently it's not working on any RHEL version as i describe. > 2. Multi Node -> OpenShift -> CoreOS -> CRI-O. The product installs on > cloud providers (AWS, GCP, Azure, and soon to be OSP, and RHEV. Code Ready > Containers (CRC), which is a single node OpenShift even installs on > libvirt). > and currently there is working coreos. > From an upstream perspective, these are all lego blocks, and they can be > mixed and matched to build whatever you want or need. > 1. Fedora CoreOS > 2. CRI-O > 3. Regular Fedora > 4. Podman, Buildah, Skopeo > > There are no plans to offer CRI-O and CoreOS support separately from > OpenShift, and no roadmap. We will continue to invest in new features > targeting the two use cases mentioned above. Hopefully, that will clarify > the big picture of why we are doing things the way we are. > do you think that no roadmap is good message for developers? > Best Regards > Scott M > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:32 PM Daniel Walsh <dwa...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On 10/1/19 2:35 PM, Farkas Levente wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > It'd be very nice to get something useful information about the >> > current state and future plan of RH about containerization. >> > TL;DR is there anybody who knows anything about it? >> > >> > IMHO the current communication about containerization is a very bad >> > state. >> > That's the reason why i choose to reply this thread since imho like >> > the content of this mail should have to be announced etc. >> > >> > Let me describe what i see (which may be wrong) about the whole rh >> > containerization. >> > >> > >> > if i'd like to use amazon, google etc there is a full framework for >> > everything. i mean registry (virtual) hosts or container runtime >> > environment, file storage, sql, nosql storage, messaging logging, >> > kubernetes etc... >> > >> > when i like to use my own eg. private environment than i have to build >> > up all of this part of the system. suppose i prefer redhat/centos >> > based stuff and plan to be ready in a year. what should i have to do? >> > >> > probably read the docs...ooohhh which docs and where and what.... >> > here comes the real problems. >> > >> > so what i need? >> > >> > a host operating system. which one? >> > - rhel/centos 7 vs 8? >> > - atomic ? >> > - coreos ? >> > which one to choose? atomic was rh recommendation and after rh buy >> > coreos it's not possible to choose. but atomic was also deprecated. or >> > not? it's not even documented on atomic homepage that it's deprcated >> > !!! just one hidden blog post about it which refer to that coreos will >> > be the future. but there is no coreos since the old one is no longer >> > available. there is no rhel/centos coreos. but fedora coreos is not >> > even in beta stage! only one page long docs about it! >> > do you really thing than a blog post is the best place to know the >> > future plan of the whole rh's host os and the future plan? >> > >> > is there any roadmap/future plan/direction what we can expect? what's >> > your plan with some kind of milestone/timeline etc? >> > >> > or should i choose rhel? which one? rhel-8 has podman-1.0.0 which is >> > totally unusable. so it's better if you do NOT choose rhel/centos 8 >> > over 7.7 (which is imho nonsense). and there not even an update but >> > let me write about it later.. >> > >> > ok i don't know which host os to choose and not really helpful any >> > docs about it what's more can't know anything about the future plan. >> > >> RHEL8 version of podman should be updated next month with the release of >> rhel8.1, from that point forward it will be updated every three months, >> to close to the current release. Some unfortunate circumstances >> caused us to delay release for 6 months. >> >> >> > >> > i need a container framework. which one? >> > docker as a primary choice but rh do not support it. the latest >> > version is 1.13 and won't be updated. even rh's own docs (openshift >> > and kubernetes docs also) start with "delete rh's docker, download >> > docker ce from docker and install it". really? that's the way? what is >> > the plan for the future? >> > >> RHEL is moving away from Docker to podman, buildah and skopeo. For >> OpenShift we are using CRI-O for the container engine. >> >> >> We cover this in this blog >> >> >> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/rhel-8-enables-containers-tools-software-craftsmanship-0 >> >> Which was the first hit on Google while searching for "rhel8 container >> technologies" >> >> > >> > kubernetes, openshift or okd? of course it's depend on the host os and >> > what is supported on it. even in openshift and okd (which are rh >> > products) none of the use rh's rpm and it's version of docker, podman >> > or anything like them. what is the future in this case? is there any >> > roadmap? >> > just read okd docs (which is owned by rh). it's always refer to >> > dockerhub's and not rh's container image. it's always refer to docker >> > and not podman. >> > >> If you want to buy a supported version of Kubernetes from Red Hat it is >> OpenShift, our enterprise version of Kubernetes. OKD is the upstream of >> OpenShift, which used kubernetes for its upstream. Neither okd or >> kubernetes will be packaged directly on RHEL. You need to access to the >> OpenShift repos to get the kubernetes package. >> > >> > ocr-i, podman, etc. can we replace docker by this tools? may be in the >> > future...but when? what is the roadmap? what a developer should have >> > to use in this own developer machines? on rhel/centos-8 nothing is >> > working podman is till in 1.0.0. >> Hopefully next month RHEL8.1 and then RHEL8.1.1 to get to podman-1.6 >> release. >> > on rhel/centos 7.7 latest podman can't be use in rootless mode which >> > can be the biggest advantage over docker (just see the bugzilla entry >> > about it). >> We are working to rootless fixed in RHEL7.8 but this is a very old >> kernel, and going into the next phase of maintenance mode. So getting >> major changes into the kernel to support usernamespace and fuse file >> systems is difficult. >> > may be fadora working....but after in production you can't use what >> > you use for development. >> > so conclusion: >> > - atomic depricated >> > - coreos still not in beta no docs >> > - rhel/centos 7 not working in rootless mode >> > - rhel/centos 8 almost nothing is working 1.0.0 version >> > is there anybody at rh really cares about developer? do you guys try >> > to give developers any help? in any way? >> > i'm not mean in a "steve ballmer developers" way but still ... >> > >> > >> > how can communicate different containers without --net host? docker's >> > --link not implemented. docker network not implemented in rootless >> > mode. cni network can't be defined without root access to the system. >> >> podman network is in podman 1.6 release. >> >> We also are working on support for podman working with a CNI that has >> dns support for easier communication between containers. >> >> > anybody use podman for development? use it for with multi container >> > way? or everybody use sudo podman (so why it's better then docker? ok >> > i know why but i hope you understand the point). >> >> Currently we tell people that need containers to communicate to use >> pod's but we are working to fix this. Come to the libpod github to open >> issues or send mails to podman.io to discuss developments. >> >> >> > >> > >> > which image to choose from which registry? dockerhub or rh's registries? >> > have you ever try to use dockerhub mariadb or mongo vs rh's one? why >> > they are so different? i understand that rhel is based on rh's rpms >> etc.. >> > but just refer to the original thread of this mail... >> > do you/we need ContainerApplicationGenericLabels? >> > do you will support atomic command? otherwise why we need those labels? >> >> `podman container runlabel` supports the use of run labels. Most of the >> functionality of the atomic command has been merged into podman. >> >> >> > how can a developer test the whole system in his own developer >> > machine? have you EVER try it? i don't think so! if yes than you >> > should have to: >> > - run docker ce from docker >> > - run podman in root mode >> > - use dockerhub's images >> > eg. rh's mariadb image use mariadb scl rpms which run in user 27 which >> > mapped to some id outside the container which is the same as the >> > rootless user who run the container eg 100027. so root access on the >> > developer machine required and addition work by root to create such a >> > filesystem setup and be able to use the same container environment as >> > in production. which can be the biggest advantage using docker. >> > and all of the rhel's image use ContainerApplicationGenericLabels and >> > the same working model. >> > >> > and still not mention other part of the container cluster. >> > >> > yes it's very important that selinux work with contianers but IMHO >> > it's much more important to at least something working without >> > selinux. selinux was just one example because for me it seems there >> > are a lots of useful work in the background but cant see priorities >> > and clear goals and roadmaps. >> > >> > so my question is short: >> > >> > - is there any high level overview of a private containerized system >> > using rh's tool in the next few year? >> > - is there any plan about it? >> > - is it public? can someone share it with us? >> > - is there any roadmap, priorities? >> > - can someone tell me or much better to everybody a plan/roadmap about >> > coreos? >> > - about okd? >> > - about podman, buildah etc.... >> > >> > and not to mention which is the right forum to discuss such thing??? >> > >> > thanks in advance. >> > >> > On 9/27/19 7:20 PM, Colin Walters wrote: >> >> bubblewrap moved: https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap >> >> rpm-ostree moved: https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree >> >> >> >> Of the things remaining...probably the biggest is our docker branch: >> >> https://github.com/projectatomic/docker >> >> I feel like it'd be cleanest if we created a new org for this >> >> stuff...queue naming bikeshed, I know. >> >> >> >> There's also: >> >> https://github.com/projectatomic/ContainerApplicationGenericLabels - >> >> did we ever standardize that stuff elsewhere? >> >> >> >> I think if we got those bits done we could probably mass-archive the >> >> remaining repos. >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > > -- > > -- > > Scott McCarty, RHCA > Product Management - Containers, Red Hat Enterprise Linux & OpenShift > Email: smcca...@redhat.com > Phone: 312-660-3535 > Cell: 330-807-1043 > Web: http://crunchtools.com > > Have questions on Red Hat UBI? Check out the official FAQ: > https://red.ht/2yaUcez > > -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"
