My 2 cents about the "contrib" repo for best effort support and experimental code we already have a repo
It used be named incubator-openwhisk-experimental, but then we rename it to incubator-openwhisk-devtools [1] If any one has some cool experiments we have created a new folder in the repo and add some trivial travis test [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-devtools -cs On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 2:13 AM Michele Sciabarra <mich...@sciabarra.com> wrote: > Hmm, I understand the concern but I wonder HOW the "convenience" binaries > should be handled in practice. > > In OpenWhisk what it matters is the runtime you specify with --docker, so > that "convenience" is not really just a convenience, it is a core > requirement. > > We could setup an openwhisk contrib repository, but I cannot image a > single Travis build to be able to rebuild many images (at the moment I have > at least 4) and push all of them to docker hub... > > > -- > Michele Sciabarra > mich...@sciabarra.com > > ----- Original message ----- > From: Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@adobe.com.INVALID> > To: "dev@openwhisk.apache.org" <dev@openwhisk.apache.org> > Subject: Re: I created a variant of the go runtime that is faster at init > time > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:00:07 +0000 > > Hi Michele > > This is shaky ground and we don’t want to be the next npm horror story. > > Technically speaking, at Apache we primarily release source packages, all > binary is pure convenience. Granted the convience today is what most people > use. > > So what we should primarily do, as Bertrand hinted, is have a contrib > repository. We can still have a contrib docker account into which the > OpenWhisk PMC can regularly „dump“ binary builds for convience. But it must > be clearly stated that those are not releases, have no release quality and > all the usual disclaimers. > > Regards > Felix > > > Am 12.12.2018 um 10:55 schrieb Michele Sciabarra <mich...@sciabarra.com > >: > > > > Actually more than an account on GitHub it is important to have a docker > hub account named "openwhisk-contrib" so you can deploy an action with > something like: > > > > wsk create myaction --docker openwhisk-contrib/actionloop-gccgo-v1.10 > > > > To publish images, you can do sothing as simple as ask, maybe opening a > ticket, to push an image msciab/actionloop-gccgo-v1.10 > > to openwhisk-contrib/actionloop-gccgo-v1.10. > > > > > > > > -- > > Michele Sciabarra > > mich...@sciabarra.com > > > > ----- Original message ----- > > From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> > > To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org > > Subject: Re: I created a variant of the go runtime that is faster at > init time > > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:45:43 +0100 > > > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:42 AM Michele Sciabarra > > <mich...@sciabarra.com> wrote: > >> > >> Indeed I was thinking to create a docker account "openwhisk-contrib" > to place those, let's say, unofficial images. > >> I am not sure who should own this account... > > > > Accounts with "openwhisk" in their name should be owned by the > > OpenWhisk (P)PMC as the name is a trademark of the Apache Software > > Foundation - technically being donated as we speak IIUC but that > > doesn't make a real difference. > > > > However what we are discussing here IMO is code repositories as code > > is what the ASF produces. I guess Felix's suggestion is to create one > > or a few openwhisk-contrib-* Git repositories under > > https://github.com/apache/ for such "contrib" modules. > > > > -Bertrand > > -- Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com>
