The go repo could hold the code to produce the 3 runtime images For example: action-loop-v1.0.1:tag action-go-v1.11:tag action-gccgo-v1.10:tag
- Carlos Santana @csantanapr > On Dec 12, 2018, at 9:25 AM, Rodric Rabbah <rod...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 “I think it would be better to organize around 1 git repo per language.” > > -r > >> On Dec 12, 2018, at 9:21 AM, David P Grove <gro...@us.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> For the runtimes specifically, if it is technically feasible I think it >> would be better to organize around 1 git repo per language. >> >> That repo could contain multiple runtime variants with different degrees of >> maturity. Several of the runtime repos already contain multiple variants >> (nodejs, php, python). Can that pattern work for go too? >> >> --dave >> >> Carlos Santana ---12/12/2018 07:26:56 AM---My 2 cents about the "contrib" >> repo for best effort support and experimental code we already have a >> >> From: Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com> >> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org >> Date: 12/12/2018 07:26 AM >> Subject: Re: I created a variant of the go runtime that is faster at init >> time >> >> >> >> >> 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> >> >> >>
