Any update on this? I've just seen that Victor Romero archived his
unofficial docker image. :(

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 4:57 PM Clebert Suconic <[email protected]>
wrote:

> 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
>

Reply via email to