I tried to follow the JIRA on Infra and I did not see much information about it.
What's the procedure to upload images? The only thing I saw was this JIRA: But it seemed you would be uploading images manually? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21430 Isn't there an official way to provide the images? In artemis we have a docker module where you would build the binaries and create the image. We would just need to add that to a Jenkins build and produce an image whenever a tag is created. I suppose ActiveMQ branch would do the same... How this is supposed to work? thank you On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:13 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 > > The initial features list and notes in the JIRA reflect this approach. I’ll > start on the module and push a PR this weekend. > > Thanks, > Matt > > > On Feb 17, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I agree, I think it’s the most convenient approach. > > > > For instance, at Karaf, I maintain a Dockerfile as part of the codebase: > > https://github.com/apache/karaf/tree/master/assemblies/docker > > <https://github.com/apache/karaf/tree/master/assemblies/docker> > > > > As part of a Karaf release, I’m pushing Karaf docker image. > > > > However, anyone can start from the Karaf Dockerfile to create their own one > > (we also provide a goal on the karaf-maven-plugin to do so). > > > > I think ActiveMQ (at least classic) should just provide a Dockerfile (or a > > set) and push "official" docker images. But still letting people to create > > their own. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > >> Le 17 févr. 2021 à 19:51, Hossack, Etienne <[email protected]> a > >> écrit : > >> > >> Hi all, > >> Following this discussion with interest, since I greatly enjoy the > >> portability and consistency that Docker provides. > >> I have some questions about the Dockerfile linked above that might be best > >> served in a code review, but a more holistic question I wanted to ask: > >> Does ActiveMQ need to publish the Dockerfile? > >> In my opinion, simply defining the image then documenting its location > >> (README, website) and how to use it would add value to many consumers. > >> That way: > >> * The Dockerfile code can live within the ActiveMQ repository and be close > >> to the code > >> * Anyone who wishes to consume the dockerfile can (Apache 2.0 license) > >> through their own build process > >> * The ActiveMQ community does not need to maintain any additional > >> infrastructure, release process, repositories, dependencies. > >> * The Dockerfile can and should be independent of particular binaries > >> <https://docs.docker.com/develop/develop-images/dockerfile_best-practices/#env> > >> whenever possible, but even if not, this way each active branch would be > >> the source of truth for a functioning Dockerfile (can build and run tests > >> on the version), and no incremental versions would have to be published. > >> I think we could gain lots of value for little investment this way. What > >> do you think? > >> > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Étienne > >> > >> P.S. should I add the questions on the JIRA ticket as well? > >> > >> > >> Étienne Hossack > >> Software Development Engineer, Amazon MQ > >> email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >> phone: +1-778-945-8287 > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Feb 17, 2021, at 9:38 AM, Clebert Suconic <[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>> > >>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not > >>> click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and > >>> know the content is safe. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> It would be nice to do the same with Artemis... we already have scripts to > >>> build the images as part of the build.. we just don't have the builds yet. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:36 AM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) < > >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hello All, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Quick introduction: My name is Rod. I work with Chuck. I am stepping > >>>> in > >>>> while he is out. I am the coworker who does the TomEE images. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I have a question on the tarballs on https://archive.apache.org > >>>> <https://archive.apache.org/> and > >>>> https://repo1.maven.org <https://repo1.maven.org/>. I noticed that the > >>>> images are not the same SHA > >>>> and not the same size. Is there a reason for that? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> BTW, the Dockerfile is mostly complete, > >>>> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16/jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile > >>>> > >>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16/jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile>. > >>>> I think the only thing left was getting the maven download to work as the > >>>> fallback to the other repos. I can still make that work, but I thought > >>>> it > >>>> was strange to see a difference in the sizes of the files. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> This is what we are proposing. I am going to start on the other options > >>>> later today. We would be happy for any feedback. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> > >>>> Rod. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> *From: *"Shank, Charles R" <[email protected] > >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> > >>>> *Date: *Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 8:49 AM > >>>> *To: *Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected] > >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>, Matt Pavlovich < > >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>, > >>>> "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" > >>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > >>>> *Cc: *"Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" <[email protected] > >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> > >>>> *Subject: *Official Docker Image for ActiveMQ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Jean, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I agree we should make this its own issue and open up the discussion to > >>>> the ActiveMQ community > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Currently, we are working on the following repository to provide generic > >>>> images available to the ActiveMQ community. You can follow our progress > >>>> here: *https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq > >>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq> > >>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq > >>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq>>* > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Because the needs of the community are varied, we recommend making > >>>> multiple versions of ActiveMQ classic and Artemis. The repos also will > >>>> be > >>>> created to include OpenJDK and AdoptopenJDK. We also recommend leaving > >>>> room for other operating systems other than Debian and multiple versions > >>>> of > >>>> JDK within both OpenJDK and AdoptopenJDK. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Given the number of options, we are not sure how we would go about using > >>>> a > >>>> module to maintain the dockerfiles, but would be open to it. Once we > >>>> get > >>>> our dockerimages complete, we can discuss how they are maintained going > >>>> forward. We will also investigate with the folks at > >>>> https://github.com/docker-library <https://github.com/docker-library> > >>>> to see what is required to get our > >>>> images listed as the official images. I have a coworker that is > >>>> responsible for the TomEE official images and has some contacts there. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> We would like to get the communities thoughts and input on this course of > >>>> action. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Thank you > >>>> > >>>> Chuck Shank > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> [image: cid:[email protected] > >>>> <cid:[email protected]>] > >>>> [image: cid:[email protected] > >>>> <cid:[email protected]>] > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Clebert Suconic > >> > > > -- Clebert Suconic
