I don't think anything is strictly needed from you at this point, but things happen when people drive them, and participation in that effort would help make sure it gets done. I think at this point the tasks on our end are watching LEGAL-437 for advice (or making it moot by removing the MySQL jar), asking Infra to set up automated builds once that is sorted out, and building some kind of consensus around how we'll label and promote the Docker images.
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 12:13 PM Don Bowman <d...@agilicus.com> wrote: > i'd be fine w/ removing the mysql, i'm using postgresql for the metadata. > if this is the case we should consider relfecting postgres as the default > metadata in the docs. > however, i think this is mere aggregation under the gpl license, and the > docker image tends to have other (e.g. bash) gpl code. druid's start > scripts are all bash-specific as an example. > > I'm not clear if anything further is needed of me, i'm hoping to get an > automated build going into dockerhub, and tagged w/ each release. i think > this will help adoption. > > > > On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 at 14:22, Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> wrote: > > > First off thanks a lot for your work here Don!! > > > > I really do think, though, that we need to be careful about the inclusion > > of the MySQL connector jar. ASF legal has been clear in the past that ASF > > projects should not distribute it as part of binary convenience releases: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-200. I think having the > > Dockerfile in the repo is probably fine: in that case we are not > > distributing the jar itself, just, essentially, a pointer to how to > > download it. But if we start offering a prebuilt Docker image, it is less > > clear to me if that is fine or not. In the interests of resolving this > > question one way or the other, I opened a question asking about this > > specific situation: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-437. > > > > About Dylan's questions: my feeling is that we should go ahead and enable > > automated pushes to Docker Hub, and provide some appropriate language > > around what people should expect out of it. I don't think 'experimental' > is > > the right word, but we should be clear around exactly what contract we > are > > adhering to. Is it something people can expect to be published with each > > release? Is it something that we are going to build and test as part of > the > > release process, or are we going to publish it via automation without any > > testing? Is it something we expect people to use in production, or > > something we only expect people to use for evaluation? If it is something > > we expect people to use in production, do we expect them to use it in any > > particular way? Will we be guaranteeing certain things (file layout, etc) > > that provide a stable interface for people to build derived images from? > > > > The path of least resistance to answering these questions is to say that > > the Docker image is provided in the hopes that it is useful, but that it > is > > done via an automated build, without any pre-release testing, and without > > any particular guarantees about the 'interface' it provides. If this is > the > > case then I would suggest putting it up on Docker Hub with an appropriate > > disclaimer and not promoting it too much. (We might very well end up > > pushing images every once in a while that don't work right, and it would > > reflect poorly on the project to have those be prominently linked-to.) It > > becomes easier to strengthen these guarantees if we add an automated test > > suite that we can run before releases which verifies functionality and > > interface adherence. > > > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 7:14 AM Rajiv Mordani <rmord...@vmware.com.invalid > > > > wrote: > > > > > This is purely a packaging exercise. I don't see a reason to mark this > as > > > experimental. > > > > > > Rajiv. > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Dylan Wylie <dylanwy...@apache.org> > > > Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 6:08:47 AM > > > To: dev@druid.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: docker build > > > > > > I believe all we have to do is submit a ticket to Apache's > Infrastructure > > > team and then we'll have some automatic process that'll automatically > > > update docker-hub with images relating to each release. > > > > > > I guess there's two open questions I think we should reach a consensus > on > > > (others feel free to add more!). > > > > > > - Are we as a community happy to "support" an additional release > > artefact? > > > I'm happy to try to incorporate this into my employer's testing > > > infrastructure to help catch any regressions on future releases but > > that's > > > just one data point on each release. > > > > > > - Along the same vein, do we follow the same process as we do with new > > > features and mark this as experimental for some time? > > > > > > On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 at 13:25, Don Bowman <d...@agilicus.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Now that > > > > > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fincubator-druid%2Fpull%2F6896&data=02%7C01%7Crmordani%40vmware.com%7C942b2af1dfb740fcbed308d68dcef937%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C1%7C636852317419449405&sdata=EXigZIBkKiatM0rEgyQRoxA9ER8u8amiAfPN0MghzjE%3D&reserved=0 > > > is merged > > > > (thank you!) > > > > > > > > who can get this set to build into Dockerhub? Presumably > automatically > > > on a > > > > 'tag' of the repo. > > > > > > > > Once that is done it is much more convenient for folks to use this > > tool. > > > > > > > > --don > > > > > > > > > >
