+1

No need for an additional repo, the logic can be in Releng..
Functest will probably move to different containers some time soon, so that is 
something we could also leverage.

-Jose-


On 23 Jun 2017, at 18:39, Julien 
<julien...@gmail.com<mailto:julien...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Agree,

If StorPerf can list some rules and examples, current scripts can be adapted 
for multiple docker image building and other project can use this type of 
changes. It is not deserved to add a new repo just for build a new image.



Fatih Degirmenci 
<fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com<mailto:fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>>于2017年6月21日周三
 上午2:26写道:
Hi Mark,

It is perfectly fine to have different build processes and/or number of 
artifacts for the projects from releng point of view.

Once you decide what to do for storperf, we can take a look and adapt docker 
build job/script to build storperf images, create additional repos on docker 
hub to push images and activate the builds when things are ready.

/Fatih

On 20 Jun 2017, at 19:18, Beierl, Mark 
<mark.bei...@dell.com<mailto:mark.bei...@dell.com>> wrote:

Hello,

I'd like to poll the various groups about ideas for how to handle this 
scenario.  I have interns working on breaking down services from StorPerf into 
different containers.  In one case, it will be a simple docker compose that is 
used to fire up existing containers from the repos, but the other case requires 
more thought.

We are creating a second container (storperf-reporting) that will need to be 
built and pushed to hub.docker.com<http://hub.docker.com/>.  Right now the 
build process for docker images lives in releng, and it only allows for one 
image to be built.  Should I be requesting a second git repo in this case, or 
should we look at changing the releng process to allow multiple docker images 
to be build?

Regards,
Mark

Mark Beierl
SW System Sr Principal Engineer
Dell EMC | Office of the CTO
mobile +1 613 314 8106<tel:1-613-314-8106>
mark.bei...@dell.com<mailto:mark.bei...@dell.com>

_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Reply via email to