See inline comments below On 05/18, Pete Muir wrote: > On 18 May 2016 at 14:50, Charlie Drage <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all! > > > > I've made some considerable progress in regards to the Nulecule / > > Atomic App direction and how we're becoming more of a deployment tool > > for distributing and deploying multi-container applications. > > > > However! I'm starting to become blocked now due to awaiting spec / > > code reviews as I begin to finish / catch up to my original workload. > > Although I could merge it individually, it's best to get a community > > review / support on it before continuing :) > > > > One of the biggest changes is the specification, as per pull: > > https://github.com/projectatomic/nulecule/pull/205 which makes some > > considerable changes to the way we write Nulecule files. If I could get > > some input on it, that would be great as it would create some work to > > get added to Atomic App / Nulecule as well as decrease the learning > > curve associated with creating and generating a Nulecule file. > > Could you summarise the changes you have made. I couldn't find an > actual spec change in the changeset, just changes to example files.
Ah yes! It was just the addition of the example files as I found that the easiest way to reflect the largeer changes without re-writting the entire documentation. If the original spec writers give their approval for the change I can write a large PR which will change/re-write the original documentation to conform to the new spec. > > > > > Another large change is the addition to *binary* generation for Atomic > > App, creating support for not only Linux, but Mac OS X and Windows > > platforms, allowing the ability to use Atomic App to deploy a > > multi-container application on a cluster from whichever platform you > > wish, whether or not it uses Python on the distribution. I've tested > > the generated binary on multiple operating systems and it appears to > > work awesomely! > > I don't quite understand this one - do you have a video of it in action? > > Would be good to add this to the sprint review. Not yet! I've tested it on some other platforms such as CoreOS / Project Atomic / Debian / CentOS which are of course all Linux specific. *theoretically* there shouldn't be a problem running it on Mac OS X / Windows. As the tool used for the binary generation (pyinstaller) works on all platforms. I'm awaiting for the PR's to be commented on if this is a step in the right direction and then I can pull out my Windows machine and start testing it more then. I'm sure I'll encounter a few bugs (I know of one right now with .kube/config pulling...) > > > > > A third change is the addition of the Kubernetes binary usage to the > > API, which (at the moment) contains an additional 1200 lines of code > > to be added to Atomic App. Both functional and unit tests pass :) > > > > Many thanks and happy coding! > > -- > > > > Charlie Drage > > Red Hat - OSAS Team / Project Atomic > > 4096R / 0x9B3B446C > > http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x622CDF119B3B446C > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Devtools mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/devtools -- Charlie Drage Red Hat - OSAS Team / Project Atomic 4096R / 0x9B3B446C http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x622CDF119B3B446C _______________________________________________ Container-tools mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/container-tools
