Mousius commented on code in PR #66: URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/66#discussion_r847301225
########## rfcs/0000-docker-image-tags.md: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ +- Feature Name: docker_image_tag_format +- Start Date: 2022-04-08 +- RFC PR: [apache/tvm-rfcs#0000](https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/0000) +- GitHub Issue: [apache/tvm#0000](https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/0000) + +# Summary + +Defines a format for TVM CI Docker images tag. + +# Motivation + +In the current format used to identify our Docker images, it is impossible to link back a given version of the image to which version of the repository that represents. + +# Guide-level explanation + +For years we have been using a patern to version our CI Docker images, which is composed by v0.INCREMENTAL_NUMBER, e.g. tlcpack/ci_cpu:v0.80. Every time an image is updated, we bump the minor number, just as a way to release a new version. Review Comment: ```suggestion For years we have been using a pattern to version our CI Docker images, which is composed by v0.INCREMENTAL_NUMBER, e.g. tlcpack/ci_cpu:v0.80. Every time an image is updated, we bump the minor number, just as a way to release a new version. ``` ########## rfcs/0000-docker-image-tags.md: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ +- Feature Name: docker_image_tag_format +- Start Date: 2022-04-08 +- RFC PR: [apache/tvm-rfcs#0000](https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/0000) +- GitHub Issue: [apache/tvm#0000](https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/0000) + +# Summary + +Defines a format for TVM CI Docker images tag. + +# Motivation + +In the current format used to identify our Docker images, it is impossible to link back a given version of the image to which version of the repository that represents. + +# Guide-level explanation + +For years we have been using a patern to version our CI Docker images, which is composed by v0.INCREMENTAL_NUMBER, e.g. tlcpack/ci_cpu:v0.80. Every time an image is updated, we bump the minor number, just as a way to release a new version. + +As the project is growing and given we recently have been improving the Docker images building process, it is time to consider using a more meaningful tagging scheme, so that it is easier to identify what is included in the images being used in our CI. + +When looking/using a Docker image, usually we would be interested in: + +1. How long ago was this image generated? +2. What is the last change added in the current images being used in production? + +None of these questions can be answered by our current numbering scheme, and to get that information we would usually need to do some digging and inspecting the image to see what is in there. + +# Reference-level explanation + +As an improvement to the current situation, this RFC proposes the adption of a tagging scheme currently used in the `tlcpackstaging` (https://hub.docker.com/u/tlcpackstaging) repository, composed by: Review Comment: ```suggestion As an improvement to the current situation, this RFC proposes the adoption of a tagging scheme currently used in the `tlcpackstaging` (https://hub.docker.com/u/tlcpackstaging) repository, composed by: ``` -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
