Hi Elisey. I like the idea of the docker image, but I don't understand
why you need us to "move forward" with it. The last time this came up
I spent some time looking at the docker site and I noticed that both
tomcat and httpd were represented already. From looking at the
activity on the docker site I could only see that someone had
submitted the support, and it was accepted. I see no input from the
TLPs representing these code bases. Likely I missed it, can you point
us to what other Apache projects have done in similar cases? I ask
because I spent the time to look thinking it would make things easier
if we (zk community) could just copy what other projects, such as
httpd/tomcat, had done.

Patrick


On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Елисей Занько <[email protected]> wrote:
> Folks,
>
>     Congrats on the 3.5.2 alpha release!
>     Flavio, can we somehow move forward with the Docker image now?
>
> Thanks,
> Elisey.
>
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 9:48 PM Елисей Занько <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>     Patrick, no worries!
>>     So what's our next step? Flavio, would you like to take a closer look
>> at the Dockerfile and the docs after 3.5.2 is out?
>>     If it looks good could someone please leave a short comment on behalf
>> of the committers team in the PR
>> <https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/1765>?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Elisey
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 11:38 PM Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Елисей Занько <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Guys,
>>> >
>>> >     Thanks for bringing this up! Maybe this
>>> > https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/official_repos/ will clarify things
>>> a
>>> > bit more.
>>> >
>>> >     "While it is preferrable to have upstream software authors
>>> maintaining
>>> > their corresponding Official Repositories, this is not a strict
>>> > requirement. Creating and maintaining images for Official Repositories
>>> is a
>>> > public process. It takes place openly on GitHub where participation is
>>> > encouraged. Anyone can provide feedback, contribute code, suggest
>>> process
>>> > changes, or even propose a new Official Repository."
>>> >
>>> >     Patrick, the image I proposed does use the official ZK releases from
>>> > the Apache mirrors. Moreover, during the build process the PGP
>>> signature of
>>> > the distro is checked as required by the Docker library contributing
>>> > guidelines. You can see this here
>>> >
>>> >
>>> https://github.com/31z4/zookeeper-docker/blob/master/3.4.8/Dockerfile#L20-L35
>>> >
>>> >
>>> I thought the approach looked good, that example was just an example of
>>> what not to do, didn't mean to imply that it was an issue here. Sorry if
>>> there was confusion.
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>>
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Elisey
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:46 PM Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > So I have it backward then? In that case what would we need to
>>> > contribute?
>>> > > I do see tomcat and httpd there, but from what I can tell the
>>> "official"
>>> > > aspect is in terms of the dockerfile/image rather than from the
>>> project
>>> > > being "dockerized". As long as the work there is not conflicting with
>>> > > trademark/copyright/etc... it should be fine I would think. For
>>> example
>>> > if
>>> > > docker attempted to create their own releases and call them "apache
>>> > > zookeeper x.y.z" rather than using our releases as the basis for the
>>> > images
>>> > > that would be an issue.
>>> > >
>>> > > Patrick
>>> > >
>>> > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Flavio Junqueira <
>>> > > [email protected]> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > My interpretation is that it is official from a Docker perspective,
>>> not
>>> > > > from a Apache ZooKeeper perspective. I wonder if we can make the
>>> > official
>>> > > > docker image also official apache zk image.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > -Flavio
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > On 24 Jun 2016, at 16:35, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > My 0.02 - I wouldn't define anything as "official" that isn't
>>> part of
>>> > > the
>>> > > > > project itself. That said if folks want to create projects such as
>>> > this
>>> > > > I'm
>>> > > > > fine with them linking from something like the wiki. We've done
>>> > similar
>>> > > > for
>>> > > > > client bindings:
>>> > > > >
>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/ZKClientBindings
>>> > > I
>>> > > > > don't see why we couldn't create a "Running ZooKeeper in
>>> Containers"
>>> > > type
>>> > > > > of wiki page and link from that.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Patrick
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Flavio Junqueira <[email protected]
>>> >
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >> Let's resume this once 3.5.2 is out, I'm interested in pursuing
>>> it.
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> -Flavio
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >>> On 24 Jun 2016, at 15:01, Елисей Занько <[email protected]
>>> >
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> Guys,
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>>   Any ideas how we can move forward with this?
>>> > > > >>>   Would be great if someone from the committers step up here or
>>> in
>>> > > the
>>> > > > >> PR
>>> > > > >>> <https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/1765>
>>> and
>>> > > say
>>> > > > >>> something like "Yes. We're OK with that" or "No. We'll do it on
>>> our
>>> > > > own".
>>> > > > >>> Docker Library maintainers and I are really looking forward to
>>> > this!
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> Thanks,
>>> > > > >>> Elisey
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:11 PM Елисей Занько <
>>> > > [email protected]
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >>> wrote:
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>>> Patrick,
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>>   Thank you for pointing to this!
>>> > > > >>>>   Yes, I've addressed this. There is a section called "... via
>>> > > > >>>> docker-compose" in the README
>>> > > > >>>> <https://github.com/31z4/zookeeper-docker#-via-docker-compose>
>>> > > which
>>> > > > >>>> contains an example of running a ZK ensemble using Docker
>>> Compose.
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> Regards,
>>> > > > >>>> Elisey
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:04 AM Patrick Hunt <[email protected]
>>> >
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> I'm no expert but Tim Crowder has written a blog post about
>>> > > zk/docker
>>> > > > >> in
>>> > > > >>>>> the past and commented here in the list:
>>> > > > >>>>> http://markmail.org/message/7lczngv643jk6fcs
>>> > > > >>>>> have you been able to address? Or perhaps docker/zk has moved
>>> fwd
>>> > > in
>>> > > > >> some
>>> > > > >>>>> way that helps?
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> Patrick
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Елисей Занько <
>>> > > > [email protected]>
>>> > > > >>>>> wrote:
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>> Hi Flavio,
>>> > > > >>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>   I fully understand your concerns.
>>> > > > >>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>   For now there are some "official" images which are
>>> published
>>> > not
>>> > > > by
>>> > > > >>>>> ASF
>>> > > > >>>>>>       * https://github.com/docker-library/httpd
>>> > > > >>>>>>       * https://github.com/docker-library/cassandra
>>> > > > >>>>>>       * https://github.com/ahawkins/docker-thrift
>>> > > > >>>>>>   as well as some are maintained by upstream
>>> > > > >>>>>>       * https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven
>>> > > > >>>>>>       * https://github.com/docker-solr/docker-solr
>>> > > > >>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>   So I guess it can be OK for me to maintain the image. But
>>> we
>>> > > > really
>>> > > > >>>>>> need to figure it out.
>>> > > > >>>>>>   Any ideas how can we do this? I've also left a comment in
>>> > > > >>>>>> ZOOKEEPER-1940
>>> > > > >>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1940>.
>>> Maybe I
>>> > > > >> should
>>> > > > >>>>>> create an another one regarding this particular docker image?
>>> > > > >>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>> Regards,
>>> > > > >>>>>> Elisey
>>> > > > >>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 7:20 PM Flavio Junqueira <
>>> [email protected]
>>> > >
>>> > > > >> wrote:
>>> > > > >>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>> Hi Elisey,
>>> > > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>> Thanks a lot for doing this! I'm not super familiar with
>>> > > publishing
>>> > > > >>>>>> docker
>>> > > > >>>>>>> images, so please bear with me. Maybe other folks here have
>>> > more
>>> > > > >>>>>> experience
>>> > > > >>>>>>> and can add to the discussion.
>>> > > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>> One thing that called my attention is that the PR you
>>> pointed
>>> > us
>>> > > to
>>> > > > >>>>> maps
>>> > > > >>>>>>> back to your account. If it is supposed to be an official
>>> > docker
>>> > > > >>>>> image,
>>> > > > >>>>>>> then shouldn't it point to an authoritative account or site
>>> of
>>> > > the
>>> > > > >>>>> ASF? I
>>> > > > >>>>>>> guess "official" here is bothering me as I'd like to make
>>> sure
>>> > > that
>>> > > > >> we
>>> > > > >>>>>>> don't violate any policy of the ASF with respect to
>>> publishing
>>> > > > >>>>> software
>>> > > > >>>>>>> artifacts of an Apache project like ZooKeeper.
>>> > > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>> Note that I'm not saying we shouldn't move forward with
>>> this, I
>>> > > > just
>>> > > > >>>>> want
>>> > > > >>>>>>> to make sure we do it right.
>>> > > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>> -Flavio
>>> > > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>>> On 05 Jun 2016, at 14:39, Елисей Занько <
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >>>>>> wrote:
>>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Hi folks,
>>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>>>  I've submitted this PR
>>> > > > >>>>>>>> <
>>> https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/1765>
>>> > > to
>>> > > > >>>>>> Docker
>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Official Images <
>>> > > > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images
>>> > > > >>>>>> .
>>> > > > >>>>>>> It's
>>> > > > >>>>>>>> based on 31z4/zookeeper <
>>> > > https://hub.docker.com/r/31z4/zookeeper/
>>> > > > >.
>>> > > > >>>>>>>>  Would be great to get some feedback! Or maybe somebody
>>> from
>>> > the
>>> > > > >>>>> team
>>> > > > >>>>>>>> would like to collaborate on the image.
>>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>> > > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>

Reply via email to