https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/7296 is now there which removes the mysql but shows how to re-enable should someone wish.
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 07:19, Don Bowman <d...@agilicus.com> wrote: > So if I send a PR removing the mysql connector (which comes from maven > which is itself apache released), can we be done w/ this? > > I don't want to get into the fact that it runs on linux and uses bash in > scripts. > > I think there's some confusion in this thread about what people expect > from container images. We want this to be the standard image in the > Kubernetes helm chart as an exxample. No one wants to buiild their own > container and find their own registry to host it. > > But if its solely about mysql, I think removing it is fine, the postgres > connector works at least as well. > > On the 1/2/3 list: > > #1: I'll do the PR to remove mysql > #2. I cannot do this, I have no idea what Jira or apache infra is etc. > #3. I don't think this is worth doing, no one will use it except for > someone who can trivially do that themself and might want other things in > there anyway. > > so, if someone can help w/ #2 (getting the travis build to push this or > whatever) i'll do a PR for #1. > OK? > > On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 12:59, Charles Allen <charles.al...@snap.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> Honestly we're at a very strange impasse. On one hand I don't think the >> ASF >> project can adopt an official docker image unless ASF legal says its ok. >> "Official" releases are source code anyways (as my understanding goes), >> and >> binary artifacts are convenience things. Unfortunately I do not see a path >> forward unless some entity is willing to take on a stance similar as >> outlined in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-437 . This is >> pretty new territory from a legal perspective (the fact that docker images >> are layers makes it even more interesting). >> >> At this point I think the safest thing to do is something that is "no more >> GPL dependent than other containers in the apache repo", which would mean >> not adding in GPL binaries. Which means switching to postgres. I don't >> foresee an aggressive legal stance on this issue, meaning it might take a >> while as people watch where the industry is going. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:20 AM Don Bowman <d...@agilicus.com> wrote: >> >> > where do we stand on this? >> > the PR is in and accepted, but i feel we need to have this built as >> part of >> > the release artifacts and on dockerhub to foster adoption. >> > if the only issue is the mysql connector i can remove it in favour of >> the >> > postgres connector. >> > >> > >> > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 13:58, Don Bowman <d...@agilicus.com> wrote: >> > >> > > i can just remove the mysql, the postgres works, i was just assuming >> > folks >> > > wanted it. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 16:58, Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> wrote: >> > > >> > >> A discussion is progressing on >> > >> >> > >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__issues.apache.org_jira_browse_LEGAL-2D437&d=DwIFaQ&c=ncDTmphkJTvjIDPh0hpF_w&r=HrLGT1qWNhseJBMYABL0GFSZESht5gBoLejor3SqMSo&m=SDcL2cv8y5vfiK64aTakmAF8xiMVateJ6QQ3JTsegRI&s=uXRQeP8EnjcHXQmG5oJoTQN2ztfu7N0YCNLpS_aj93g&e= >> . >> > It doesn't seem to have >> > >> got anywhere firm yet. >> > >> >> > >> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 12:23 PM Gian Merlino <g...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__issues.apache.org_jira_browse_LEGAL-2D200&d=DwIFaQ&c=ncDTmphkJTvjIDPh0hpF_w&r=HrLGT1qWNhseJBMYABL0GFSZESht5gBoLejor3SqMSo&m=SDcL2cv8y5vfiK64aTakmAF8xiMVateJ6QQ3JTsegRI&s=tzsmBm2IIaa5BS9lQrTc9e0GDt09RmMiI4gfn9CoHT4&e= >> . >> > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__issues.apache.org_jira_browse_LEGAL-2D437&d=DwIFaQ&c=ncDTmphkJTvjIDPh0hpF_w&r=HrLGT1qWNhseJBMYABL0GFSZESht5gBoLejor3SqMSo&m=SDcL2cv8y5vfiK64aTakmAF8xiMVateJ6QQ3JTsegRI&s=uXRQeP8EnjcHXQmG5oJoTQN2ztfu7N0YCNLpS_aj93g&e= >> > . >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fgithub.com-252Fapache-252Fincubator-2Ddruid-252Fpull-252F6896-26amp-3Bdata-3D02-257C01-257Crmordani-2540vmware.com-257C942b2af1dfb740fcbed308d68dcef937-257Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0-257C0-257C1-257C636852317419449405-26amp-3Bsdata-3DEXigZIBkKiatM0rEgyQRoxA9ER8u8amiAfPN0MghzjE-253D-26amp-3Breserved-3D0&d=DwIFaQ&c=ncDTmphkJTvjIDPh0hpF_w&r=HrLGT1qWNhseJBMYABL0GFSZESht5gBoLejor3SqMSo&m=SDcL2cv8y5vfiK64aTakmAF8xiMVateJ6QQ3JTsegRI&s=I0Jmt-SqSpozqPWg-3MxWry3mQC_oFP2v9FhGUTL5Ls&e= >> > >> >> > > 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 >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >
