+1 We have used automated build docker images in docker hub account[1]. But each github repository just builds a docker image. If it is supported, it will be great.
Regards Justin https://hub.docker.com/search/?isAutomated=0&isOfficial=0&page=1&pullCount=0&q=Compass4nfv&starCount=0 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Yujun Zhang (ZTE) 发送时间: 2017年7月6日 23:42 收件人: Jose Lausuch; Beierl, Mark; [email protected] 主题: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Multiple docker containers from one project Does anybody consider using the build service from docker-hub[1] ? It supports multiple Dockerfile from same repository and easy to integrate with OPNFV Github mirror. [1]: https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/builds/ On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:02 PM Jose Lausuch <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Mark, I would incline for option 1), it sounds better than searching for a file. We could define specific values of DOCKERFILE var for each project. /Jose From: Beierl, Mark [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 16:18 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: Julien <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Fatih Degirmenci <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Jose Lausuch <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Multiple docker containers from one project Ideas: * Change the DOCKERFILE parameter in releng jjb so that it can accept a comma delimited list of Dockerfile names and paths. Problem with this, of course, is how do I default it to be different for StorPerf vs. Functest, etc? * Change the opnfv-docker.sh to search for the named DOCKERFILE in all subdirectories. This should cover the .aarch64 and vanilla docker file cases. Please +1/-1 or propose other ideas, thanks! Regards, Mark Mark Beierl SW System Sr Principal Engineer Dell EMC | Office of the CTO mobile +1 613 314 8106<tel:1-613-314-8106> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> On Jun 24, 2017, at 04:05, Jose Lausuch <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 No need for an additional repo, the logic can be in Releng.. Functest will probably move to different containers some time soon, so that is something we could also leverage. -Jose- On 23 Jun 2017, at 18:39, Julien <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Agree, If StorPerf can list some rules and examples, current scripts can be adapted for multiple docker image building and other project can use this type of changes. It is not deserved to add a new repo just for build a new image. Fatih Degirmenci <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>于2017年6月21日周三 上午2:26写道： Hi Mark, It is perfectly fine to have different build processes and/or number of artifacts for the projects from releng point of view. Once you decide what to do for storperf, we can take a look and adapt docker build job/script to build storperf images, create additional repos on docker hub to push images and activate the builds when things are ready. /Fatih On 20 Jun 2017, at 19:18, Beierl, Mark <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hello, I'd like to poll the various groups about ideas for how to handle this scenario. I have interns working on breaking down services from StorPerf into different containers. In one case, it will be a simple docker compose that is used to fire up existing containers from the repos, but the other case requires more thought. We are creating a second container (storperf-reporting) that will need to be built and pushed to hub.docker.com<http://hub.docker.com/>. Right now the build process for docker images lives in releng, and it only allows for one image to be built. Should I be requesting a second git repo in this case, or should we look at changing the releng process to allow multiple docker images to be build? Regards, Mark Mark Beierl SW System Sr Principal Engineer Dell EMC | Office of the CTO mobile +1 613 314 8106<tel:1-613-314-8106> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss -- Yujun Zhang
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
