On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 9:13 AM Johannes Kastl <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Viktor, > > On 18.04.23 at 09:02 Viktor Ashirov wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 8:15 AM Johannes Kastl <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> https://hub.docker.com/r/389ds/dirsrv only has 2.1, 2.2 and latest. 2.2 > >> and > >> latest are 8 months old. > >> > >> https://quay.io/repository/389ds/dirsrv?tab=tags only has latest and > c9s > >> without > >> any version tags (or I did not find them?). > >> > >> Would it be possible to publish the tags more often? And maybe publish > all > >> patch > >> versions (2.2.1, 2.2.6, ...) in addition? > >> > > Yes, it's possible. > > :-) > > > Using "latest" or "stable" is not a good idea for container workloads, as > >> it > >> does not allow rollbacks in case of errors or changed behaviour. Rolling > >> back is > >> easy using helm charts, but only if the image can be changed back from > say > >> 2.2.6 > >> to 2.2.5 by helm. When using stable or 2.2 or similar, the new image > will > >> be > >> fetched and the old one discarded, so it will be lost and no longer > usable. > >> > > Yes, that's understandable. As you already found out, we have a split > brain > > situation with images in different registries, so I wanted to sort this > out > > first. > Yes, I found the issue on Github regarding the images. I already commented > my ideas. > > > But I can tags to quay.io repos. > > That would be really nice. > > > One thing to keep in mind though: those minor releases might be less > > tested. I chose to follow packages in Fedora rather than 389-ds-base > > versions because these packages go through testing with FreeIPA and > OpenQA. > > But I guess with helm and deployments rollback this is less of an issue. > > Basically I would like to have **one** usable image with the tags. If this > is > based on Fedora, C9s or openSUSE does not matter much to me (remember, > container, I do not need to do anything inside the container normally :-) > ). So > if you just follow the Fedora ones as they are tested the most that would > be > fine for me. > I agree. Also maintaining different images for different distributions adds maintenance burden. So I'd like to consolidate images and tags, and provide a solution that makes sense. > The setup aka environment variables etc. should be the same on all of the > images, as they are interpreted by the dscontainer binary that comes from > 389ds-base if I understood this correct? > At least 2.2.x and 2.3.x have the same dscontainer entrypoint. So yes, they are the same. > > Kind Regards, > Johannes > > -- > Johannes Kastl > Linux Consultant & Trainer > Tel.: +49 (0) 151 2372 5802 > Mail: [email protected] > > B1 Systems GmbH > Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg > http://www.b1-systems.de > GF: Ralph Dehner > Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 > > _______________________________________________ > 389-users mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue > -- Viktor
_______________________________________________ 389-users mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
