Why should we avoid copy? Why do a git clone of the existing git clone? Almost every dockerfile example I have seen uses copy, not a second got checkout of the same code.
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> On Jul 9, 2017, at 21:00, Cedric OLLIVIER <ollivier.ced...@gmail.com<mailto:ollivier.ced...@gmail.com>> wrote: No we cannot (parent directory) and we should mostly avoid copying files (except for configurations). For instance, you could have a look to https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/36963/. All Dockerfiles simply download Alpine packages, python packages (Functest + its dependencies) and upper constraints files. testcases.yaml is copied from host as it differs between our containers (smoke, healthcheck...). Cédric 2017-07-10 1:25 GMT+02:00 Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com<mailto:mark.bei...@dell.com>>: My only concern is for dockerfiles that do a "COPY . /home" in them. That means all the code would be located under the docker directory. I suppose multiple ../ paths can be used instead. 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> On Jul 9, 2017, at 19:03, Julien <julien...@gmail.com<mailto:julien...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Cédric, Patch in https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/36963/ is exact what I mean. Let's collect the opinions from the releng team. Julien Cedric OLLIVIER <ollivier.ced...@gmail.com<mailto:ollivier.ced...@gmail.com>>于2017年7月10日周一 上午4:15写道： Hello, Please see https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/36963/ which introduces several containers for Functest too. I think the tree conforms with the previous requirements. Automating builds on Docker Hub is a good solution too. Cédric 2017-07-09 12:10 GMT+02:00 Julien <julien...@gmail.com<mailto:julien...@gmail.com>>: Hi Jose, According to the current implementation, current script only support one Dockerfile, my personal suggestion is: 1. list all the sub-directory which contains "Dockerfile" 2. build for each sub-directory fetched in #1 3. for the names, in the top directory using the project name, in the sub-directory using: project_name-sub_directory_name not too much changes for current script and easy for project to manage. /Julien Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com<mailto:mark.bei...@dell.com>>于2017年7月7日周五 下午11:35写道： Hello, Having looked over the docker-hub build service, I also think this might be the better approach. Less code for us to maintain, and the merge job from OPNFV Jenkins can use the web hook to remotely trigger the job on docker-hub. Who has the opnfv credentials for docker-hub, and the credentials for the GitHub mirror that can set this up? Is that the LF Helpdesk? 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> On Jul 7, 2017, at 11:01, Xuan Jia <jason.jiax...@gmail.com<mailto:jason.jiax...@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 Using build service from docker-hub On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Yujun Zhang (ZTE) <zhangyujun+...@gmail.com<mailto:zhangyujun+...@gmail.com>> wrote: Does anybody consider using the build service from docker-hub[1] ? It supports multiple Dockerfile from same repository and easy to integrate with OPNFV Github mirror. [1]: https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/builds/ On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:02 PM Jose Lausuch <jose.laus...@ericsson.com<mailto:jose.laus...@ericsson.com>> wrote: Hi Mark, I would incline for option 1), it sounds better than searching for a file. We could define specific values of DOCKERFILE var for each project. /Jose From: Beierl, Mark [mailto:mark.bei...@dell.com<mailto:mark.bei...@dell.com>] Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 16:18 PM To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> Cc: Julien <julien...@gmail.com<mailto:julien...@gmail.com>>; Fatih Degirmenci <fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com<mailto:fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>>; Jose Lausuch <jose.laus...@ericsson.com<mailto:jose.laus...@ericsson.com>> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Multiple docker containers from one project Ideas: * Change the DOCKERFILE parameter in releng jjb so that it can accept a comma delimited list of Dockerfile names and paths. Problem with this, of course, is how do I default it to be different for StorPerf vs. Functest, etc? * Change the opnfv-docker.sh to search for the named DOCKERFILE in all subdirectories. This should cover the .aarch64 and vanilla docker file cases. Please +1/-1 or propose other ideas, thanks! 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> On Jun 24, 2017, at 04:05, Jose Lausuch <jose.laus...@ericsson.com<mailto:jose.laus...@ericsson.com>> wrote: +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<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss -- Yujun Zhang _______________________________________________ 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
