I am fine with it if there is someone pushing the process forward.

- Sijie

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 4:12 AM Jia Zhai <zhaiji...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 for ivan's idea
>
> Best Regards.
>
>
> Jia Zhai
>
> Beijing, China
>
> Mobile: +86 15810491983
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 6:55 PM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Il giorno gio 28 mar 2019 alle ore 09:26 Ivan Kelly <iv...@apache.org>
> > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > To clarify, what I intend to do here is.
> > >
> > > 1. Merge change from [1] to all live branches, so docker image will
> > > build directly from the voted on tag.
> > > 2. Get infra to add another autobuild rule that matches on
> > > release-([0-9.]+)\/docker, so that 4.8.2 and maybe 4.9.1 can be built
> > > with this change. This rule would not be used after that point.
> >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > >
> > > -Ivan
> > >
> > > [1]
> >
> https://github.com/ivankelly/bookkeeper/commit/e247ef705f055706604ba2f862c1006a8cf817e9
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 10:52 AM Ivan Kelly <iv...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > That’s a known issue. The auto build is controlled by ASF. We have
> > > > > discussed that before and came up the conclusion of current
> > approach. There
> > > > > is a BP to move dockerfile to a different repo. It just need
> someone
> > to
> > > > > complete the BP.
> > > >
> > > > This was a known issue a year ago. Nothing has moved on it, so I'm
> > > > trying to make movement now.
> > > >
> > > > > If you did so, you will not release 4.8.2 image, no?
> > > >
> > > > The image isn't part of the official release. At most it's a
> > > > convenience binary of the official release. However, at present it
> > > > isn't even that since it's generated from a tag which has not been
> +1d
> > > > by 3 PMC members.
> > > >
> > > > > Instead of doing a different way at the last phase of releasing a
> > release,
> > > > > I would suggest following the guide that was agreed by the
> > community, and
> > > > > work on the BP to move the dockerfile to a different repo in next
> > release.
> > > >
> > > > There's a fundamental release issue here. The official release is the
> > > > source tarball. The tag should reflect the contents of the source
> > > > tarball, and it should be possible to generate all binary convenience
> > > > packages from the source tarball.
> > > >
> > > > Things that do not match this criteria should not be presented as
> part
> > > > of the release as they have not been approved by 3 members of the
> PMC.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not going to put my signature on a tag which hasn't been voted
> on.
> > > > Currently whether tags constitute an official release artifact is
> > > > unresolved from a legal POV [1], but they are two clicks away from
> the
> > > > bookkeeper website frontpage so I think we should treat them as such.
> > > >
> > > > I will however fix the process for subsequent releases. The simplest
> > > > fix is to set the BK_VERSION from tag name. This can be done in a
> > > > build hook [2] which dockerhub autobuild[3] will pick up. Really
> > > > though we should build the tarball in a prehook so that the image can
> > > > also be generated for release candidates, so it can be tested and
> > > > voted on along with the rest of the convenience binaries.
> > > >
> > > > -Ivan
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-438
> > > > [2]
> >
> https://github.com/ivankelly/bookkeeper/commit/e247ef705f055706604ba2f862c1006a8cf817e9
> > > > [3]
> >
> https://cloud.docker.com/repository/registry-1.docker.io/ivankelly/bookkeeper/builds
> >
>

Reply via email to