I'm following up on that JIRA ticket. On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:57 AM Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Matt, I thought you already had some information about changes > on Infra. I had misunderstood you. > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:33 AM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Clebert- > > > > I do not have all the info yet, INFRA has assigned the ticket but not > > started working on it =) > > > > -Matt > > > > > On Feb 19, 2021, at 9:25 AM, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > I tried to follow the JIRA on Infra and I did not see much information > > > about it. > > > > > > What's the procedure to upload images? > > > > > > > > > The only thing I saw was this JIRA: But it seemed you would be > > > uploading images manually? > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21430 > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't there an official way to provide the images? > > > > > > > > > In artemis we have a docker module where you would build the binaries > > > and create the image. We would just need to add that to a Jenkins > > > build and produce an image whenever a tag is created. > > > I suppose ActiveMQ branch would do the same... > > > > > > > > > How this is supposed to work? > > > > > > > > > thank you > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:13 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> +1 > > >> > > >> The initial features list and notes in the JIRA reflect this approach. > > >> I’ll start on the module and push a PR this weekend. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Matt > > >> > > >>> On Feb 17, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Hi, > > >>> > > >>> I agree, I think it’s the most convenient approach. > > >>> > > >>> For instance, at Karaf, I maintain a Dockerfile as part of the > > >>> codebase: https://github.com/apache/karaf/tree/master/assemblies/docker > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/karaf/tree/master/assemblies/docker> > > >>> > > >>> As part of a Karaf release, I’m pushing Karaf docker image. > > >>> > > >>> However, anyone can start from the Karaf Dockerfile to create their own > > >>> one (we also provide a goal on the karaf-maven-plugin to do so). > > >>> > > >>> I think ActiveMQ (at least classic) should just provide a Dockerfile > > >>> (or a set) and push "official" docker images. But still letting people > > >>> to create their own. > > >>> > > >>> Regards > > >>> JB > > >>> > > >>>> Le 17 févr. 2021 à 19:51, Hossack, Etienne > > >>>> <[email protected]> a écrit : > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi all, > > >>>> Following this discussion with interest, since I greatly enjoy the > > >>>> portability and consistency that Docker provides. > > >>>> I have some questions about the Dockerfile linked above that might be > > >>>> best served in a code review, but a more holistic question I wanted to > > >>>> ask: > > >>>> Does ActiveMQ need to publish the Dockerfile? > > >>>> In my opinion, simply defining the image then documenting its location > > >>>> (README, website) and how to use it would add value to many consumers. > > >>>> That way: > > >>>> * The Dockerfile code can live within the ActiveMQ repository and be > > >>>> close to the code > > >>>> * Anyone who wishes to consume the dockerfile can (Apache 2.0 license) > > >>>> through their own build process > > >>>> * The ActiveMQ community does not need to maintain any additional > > >>>> infrastructure, release process, repositories, dependencies. > > >>>> * The Dockerfile can and should be independent of particular binaries > > >>>> <https://docs.docker.com/develop/develop-images/dockerfile_best-practices/#env> > > >>>> whenever possible, but even if not, this way each active branch would > > >>>> be the source of truth for a functioning Dockerfile (can build and run > > >>>> tests on the version), and no incremental versions would have to be > > >>>> published. > > >>>> I think we could gain lots of value for little investment this way. > > >>>> What do you think? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Cheers, > > >>>> Étienne > > >>>> > > >>>> P.S. should I add the questions on the JIRA ticket as well? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Étienne Hossack > > >>>> Software Development Engineer, Amazon MQ > > >>>> email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > >>>> phone: +1-778-945-8287 > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> On Feb 17, 2021, at 9:38 AM, Clebert Suconic > > >>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do > > >>>>> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender > > >>>>> and know the content is safe. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> It would be nice to do the same with Artemis... we already have > > >>>>> scripts to > > >>>>> build the images as part of the build.. we just don't have the builds > > >>>>> yet. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:36 AM Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod) < > > >>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Hello All, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Quick introduction: My name is Rod. I work with Chuck. I am > > >>>>>> stepping in > > >>>>>> while he is out. I am the coworker who does the TomEE images. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I have a question on the tarballs on https://archive.apache.org > > >>>>>> <https://archive.apache.org/> and > > >>>>>> https://repo1.maven.org <https://repo1.maven.org/>. I noticed that > > >>>>>> the images are not the same SHA > > >>>>>> and not the same size. Is there a reason for that? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> BTW, the Dockerfile is mostly complete, > > >>>>>> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16/jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16/jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile>. > > >>>>>> I think the only thing left was getting the maven download to work > > >>>>>> as the > > >>>>>> fallback to the other repos. I can still make that work, but I > > >>>>>> thought it > > >>>>>> was strange to see a difference in the sizes of the files. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> This is what we are proposing. I am going to start on the other > > >>>>>> options > > >>>>>> later today. We would be happy for any feedback. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Rod. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> *From: *"Shank, Charles R" <[email protected] > > >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> > > >>>>>> *Date: *Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 8:49 AM > > >>>>>> *To: *Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected] > > >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>, Matt Pavlovich < > > >>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>, > > >>>>>> "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" > > >>>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > >>>>>> *Cc: *"Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)" <[email protected] > > >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> > > >>>>>> *Subject: *Official Docker Image for ActiveMQ > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Jean, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I agree we should make this its own issue and open up the discussion > > >>>>>> to > > >>>>>> the ActiveMQ community > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Currently, we are working on the following repository to provide > > >>>>>> generic > > >>>>>> images available to the ActiveMQ community. You can follow our > > >>>>>> progress > > >>>>>> here: *https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq > > >>>>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq> > > >>>>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq > > >>>>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq>>* > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Because the needs of the community are varied, we recommend making > > >>>>>> multiple versions of ActiveMQ classic and Artemis. The repos also > > >>>>>> will be > > >>>>>> created to include OpenJDK and AdoptopenJDK. We also recommend > > >>>>>> leaving > > >>>>>> room for other operating systems other than Debian and multiple > > >>>>>> versions of > > >>>>>> JDK within both OpenJDK and AdoptopenJDK. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Given the number of options, we are not sure how we would go about > > >>>>>> using a > > >>>>>> module to maintain the dockerfiles, but would be open to it. Once > > >>>>>> we get > > >>>>>> our dockerimages complete, we can discuss how they are maintained > > >>>>>> going > > >>>>>> forward. We will also investigate with the folks at > > >>>>>> https://github.com/docker-library > > >>>>>> <https://github.com/docker-library> to see what is required to get > > >>>>>> our > > >>>>>> images listed as the official images. I have a coworker that is > > >>>>>> responsible for the TomEE official images and has some contacts > > >>>>>> there. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> We would like to get the communities thoughts and input on this > > >>>>>> course of > > >>>>>> action. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thank you > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Chuck Shank > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> [image: cid:[email protected] > > >>>>>> <cid:[email protected]>] > > >>>>>> [image: cid:[email protected] > > >>>>>> <cid:[email protected]>] > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> Clebert Suconic > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Clebert Suconic > > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic
-- Clebert Suconic
