As many as I can. Currently we do not package java broker as an RPM for Fedora/CentOS, nor do we have it packaged for Ubuntu.
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Lorenz Quack <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Irina, > > Sounds like a good idea. > > Do you plan on providing docker images of all Qpid components? > Would be good to have for example the cpp and the java broker available to > easily evaluate and compare them. > > Kind regards, > Lorenz > > > On Tue, 2017-06-13 at 10:13 -0400, Irina Boverman wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I would like to propose creating Docker images for Qpid components hosted > > in Docker Hub, updated upon component release and maintained by the > > project, and I would like to contribute to doing this. > > > > Availability of Qpid images will make it easier to consume/deploy Qpid > > components and promote Qpid visibility. > > > > We can maintain docker scripts creating these images from the base OS > > images and using Qpid installation methods consistent with the OS > > distribution. A possible naming convention might be > qpid/<component>/<OS>. > > I registered the 'qpid' user on DockerHub to use if this seems > reasonable. > > For example, we could create qpid/dispatch/<OS> image, qpid/<broker>/<OS> > > image, qpid/<client(s)>/<OS> image, etc. Initially I would look to > support > > Fedora/CentOS latest images and Qpid components as RPMs for them, then > aim > > to expand OS coverage for debian/Ubuntu/etc in the future. > > > > The goal would be to update Qpid images within a few days upon component > > release (either directly or indirectly using yum/dnf from public > > repositories). We could ask the Docker team to grant Qpid "official" > status > > when images have been stabilized. > > -- > > Regards, Irina. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
