Thanks Aldrin. I am not knowledgeable on Docker — do either of these options help us? We could also use a RUN to curl the Zip resource and COPY the unzipped directory?
[1] https://github.com/moby/moby/issues/15036#issuecomment-322177465 [2] https://github.com/jlhawn/dockramp <https://github.com/jlhawn/dockramp> Andy LoPresto [email protected] [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > On Jun 28, 2018, at 6:22 PM, Aldrin Piri <[email protected]> wrote: > > Be mindful to also update the Dockerfile used for Docker Hub as this will > require some adjustments. Unfortunately, the ADD instruction does not > support zip files. This isn't a major inconvenience but will require a > multi-stage build to help keep our image size svelte. I believe we should > be safe as we have been publishing both tarballs and zips for prior > releases, so the Dockerfile should still work in that scenario. > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 4:06 PM Andy LoPresto <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks for everyone’s input. It seems to be a clear consensus to eliminate >> .tar.gz and only provide .zip moving forward. I’d like to keep this >> discussion thread going for another day or two to field any objections. >> After that time (Friday-ish), I’ll create a Jira to do this unless things >> change. >> >> I will probably keep the possibility to generate the .tar.gz through an >> inactive profile to allow people who need that offering to use it. There >> will be a subtask Jira to update the release guide moving forward as well. >> >> >> Andy LoPresto >> [email protected] >> *[email protected] <[email protected]>* >> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 >> >> On Jun 26, 2018, at 7:52 PM, James Wing <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It's a great idea, Andy, I strongly support just one format. I think Zip >> is a good choice. >> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM Otto Fowler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I end up using zip all the time. zip +1 >> >> >> On June 26, 2018 at 13:30:33, Tony Kurc ([email protected]) wrote: >> >> My preference is zip. >> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 9:21 AM Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 6/25/18 11:34 PM, Andy LoPresto wrote: >> >> Hi folks, >> >> I do not want to start a long-running argument or entrenched battle. >> However, having just performed the RM duties for the latest release, I >> believe I have identified a resource inefficiency in the fact that we >> generate, upload, host, and distribute two compressed archives of the >> binary which are functionally equivalent. For 1.7.0, both the .tar.gz >> and .zip files are 1.2 GB (1_224_352_000 bytes for tar.gz vs. >> 1_224_392_000 bytes for zip). The time to build and sign these is >> substantial, but the true cost comes in uploading and hosting them. >> While the fabled extension registry will save all of us from this >> burden, it isn’t arriving tomorrow, and I think we could drastically >> improve this before the next release. >> >> I have no personal preference between the two formats. In earlier days, >> there were platform inconsistencies and the tools weren’t available on >> all systems, but now they are pretty standard for all users. This [1] >> >> is >> >> an interesting article I found which had some good info on the origins, >> and here are some additional resources for anyone interested [2][3]. I >> don’t care which we pick, but I propose removing one of the options for >> the build going forward (toolkit as well). >> >> That said, if someone has a good reason that both are necessary, I >> >> would >> >> love to hear it. I didn’t find anything on the Apache Release Policy >> which stated we must offer both, but maybe I missed it. Thanks. >> >> >> I'm not aware of any ASF policy. I think it mostly stems from default >> convention you get out of the maven-assembly-plugin. >> >> [1] https://itsfoss.com/tar-vs-zip-vs-gz/ >> [2] https://superuser.com/a/1257441/40003 >> [3] https://superuser.com/a/173995/40003 >> [4] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#artifacts >> >> >> Andy LoPresto >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>> >> /[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] >> <[email protected]>>/ >> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 >> >> >> >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
