Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <[email protected]> writes:

[...]

>> To be checked with the release team, but I would add it to
>> ‘etc/teams/release/artifacts-manifest.scm’ so it’s built from ci.guix.
>
> Is that file the starting point to eventually add something to the main
> download https://guix.gnu.org/sv/download/ page?  I don't understand how
> it all fits together.

The manifest above is built here:

  https://ci.guix.gnu.org/jobset/release-artifacts

We could add a link to the latest image from
<https://guix.gnu.org/download/latest/>, similar to the other links on
that page.

(Although the better option from a usability viewpoint would be to
upload those images to a registry since that’s what Docker/podman users
expect.)

> My preference is to have a couple of variants catered towards different
> use-cases:
>
> 1) One "slim" variant being the most minimal image we know how to make
> that still provides a POSIX /bin/sh environment and some way to run
> 'guix install FOO' to install other tools.
>
> 2) One "latest" (which is an odd keyword but popular idiom in the
> container world meaning "latest stable") that also contain GCC and tools
> like the above, to provide an original Unix feeling.
>
> 3) Maybe a "extra" package with TexLive, python, perl etc is not that
> critical to publish, although I find for GitLab CI/CD usage having a
> more "fat" image will speed things up.
>
> 4) An experimental "gash" image with only 'guix gash gash-utils' for an
> all-Guile Unix feeling.  While GNU CoreUtils is stable and preferrable,
> it seems interesting to explore a future all-Guile Guix setup.
>
> 5) Having 'guix system' images as was suggested seems useful too,
> although where to draw the line between "container images" and "cloud
> images" seems challenging.  Maybe we don't have to and just have a "Guix
> Container/Cloud Images Team" or something.

OK, I see.  We could limit ourselves to (1) and (2), particularly if
this is going to be built on ci.guix because that consumes quite a bit
of space.

>> For most cases I suppose you’d want guix-daemon to be up and running?
>
> But not always.  I have some GitLab CI/CD runs which just need a Guix
> environment with some pre-installed common tools to do useful work.

OK.  Then the “CI/CD” variant would have guix-daemon up and running, and
other variants not necessarily so, I guess?

(I think CI/CD should be our primary use case for those images.)

> Having them generated from ci.guix would be good enough, and maybe some
> 'Guix Container Team' could be responsible for pushing them further out
> into common registries?

Sure, sounds like a plan!

Ludo’.

Reply via email to