On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:00 PM, Tal Liron wrote: > Let's say that the reference implementation of "onap/base" is HappyLinux (I > just made that one up).
LOL, might want to be careful about "made-up" names: - https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=happy - http://www.happylinux.com.cn > Let's consider an example derivation path for one image: > > onap/base → onap/base-java-8 → onap/so I think each project should document their derivation paths and the paths should be combined to turn it into a comprehensive tree. Each of the additional packages and tweaks should also appear on the tree so that it becomes obvious when it would be beneficial to incorporate it into the base image or one of the intermediate images. There should be a sub-committee (e.g. ONAP-ARC) to make recommendations on managing the images and curating the contents, with the decisions voted by PTLs and SECCOM (since common base image upgrades will help multiple projects that use them). ONAP projects should elect to use the base images (or intermediate images) as they see fit (c.f. usage of oparent pom). Progress can be driven forwards by incorporating objective criteria into the milestones of each release, e.g. to show a reduction of footprint size or to show increased adoption of common base images. ONAP should control its own base images and those base images should be built from ONAP repositories. Keong -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#16321): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/16321 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/30776257/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
