Thanks for bringing up the multi-arch support and yes if we decide to go the route of adding the arch in the tag there is no problem doing so - although there does not seem to be any standard on where to place that string, I’ve seen tags with the arch at the front (e.g. opnfv/functest:x86_64-release-5.0.0), some at the back (opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0-x86_64). I also see that in some cases a complete different arch specific docker org is created, for example the arm32v7 organization has only containers built for arm32v7: https://hub.docker.com/u/arm32v7/ Same for arm64v8: https://hub.docker.com/u/arm64v8/
If we follow that route, we’d have a new docker org for arm e.g. opnfv-arm64v8/functest:release-5.0.0, reserving opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0 for x86 (for backward compatibility sake). But that is a different discussion which we may need to decide on by MS11. I don’t know if the container tag syntax for multi-arch is set in stone for Euphrates (copy Mark/David). Thanks Alec From: Alexandru Avadanii <alexandru.avada...@enea.com> Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 1:07 PM To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" <ahot...@cisco.com>, "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed +1 for the tag prefix. How about adding the architecture to that prefix? e.g. opnfv/functest:x86_64-release-5.0.0 From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Alec Hothan (ahothan) Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 11:01 PM To: Jose Lausuch; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed Jose, I am fine with using the “release-” prefix instead. Any prefix can work. If we want something shorter: rel-5.0.0. We can leave that decision to David. Note that what you call “none release” can actually be as important for project owners than those with the prefix ;-) Looking at the bigger picture, the official releases are just a culmination of a flurry of non-release images in the CI/CD day to day work and chances are that some of those non-prefixed releases will end up being used by other projects than OPNFV releases. Thanks for all that have voted so far! Alec From: Jose Lausuch <jalaus...@suse.com<mailto:jalaus...@suse.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" <ahot...@cisco.com<mailto:ahot...@cisco.com>>, "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>" <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>> Cc: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acmor...@att.com<mailto:acmor...@att.com>>, Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org>> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed +1 What about using tag "release-x.y.z" instead of "opnfv-x.y.z" since the name “opnfv” is already included in the image name? e.g. opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0 This way we differentiate between an official OPNFV release artifact from a none released. - Jose - On 27 Sep 2017, at 20:00, Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org>> wrote: All, Please let Alec know if you have any other questions/feedback on the proposal. The plan is to have a quick vote on the TSC call next week (October 3rd). Thanks, Ray On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:38 AM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <acmor...@att.com<mailto:acmor...@att.com>> wrote: +1 and thanks for the proposal, Alex! Al From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>] On Behalf Of Frank Brockners (fbrockne) Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 4:44 AM To: Alec Hothan (ahothan); opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed +1 – per what Alec mentioned below, the new tagging scheme is only a small change incremental change from the earlier plans, but offers a lot of flexibility moving forward. Frank From: Alec Hothan (ahothan) Sent: Montag, 25. September 2017 21:34 To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> Cc: David McBride <dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; Fatih Degirmenci <fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com<mailto:fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>>; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <fbroc...@cisco.com<mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>; Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <tapio.tallg...@nokia.com<mailto:tapio.tallg...@nokia.com>> Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed I would like to get a quick vote from any person that works directly or indirectly with code in OPNFV Please reply with -1, 0 +1 For using prefixed git tags for the Euphrates release: “opnfv-5.0.0” This is a slight change to the plan on record (which was to use “5.0.0”). This does NOT impact euphrates deliverables for participating OPNFV projects (git tags on stable/euphrates are applied by releng). The only externally visible effect is the naming of container tags for Euphrates official images in DockerHub will be named accordingly (e.g. “opnfv/functest:opnfv-5.0.0”). Everything else remains the same. If you’d like to know more, the rationale is described here: https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/releng/OPNFV+projects+and+OPNFV+release+versioning<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1dxIWZ-0001lR-44&i=57e1b682&c=ctiaIuwOIzw1UK1w-TORMjIsBTt8Xj_35pTD34cLBOnBwRvLtDG-pl1qrxZlmRQtZWujTAbkl_FfrNoQsakacUMRcUcjWib584JczR8elpqX1jlZSjfDK7KS3-zPiNIH5-KNbwvBUKVehjGFFMyjJGnXy4PLDpSGU1LqCaJeO0tuOpvp0xlws6DK3U1niforYXvMMsnioGAAyNdpIl9AMaZLHHFkTYbLww31iptsI1qvv310kT5IT7dQ_jKzZegPJJt9oZ0TBrVIKu-XFnGYzKt00A-zsEzeJ3bkuUye9KgPUa2AhsbXYdql0AdRxczwkFZ1z4R2ADa6zJfhTjFjkV2pN24hvekYpEGHFmwoGIvJYcHGhSXq0Uv12Q3ssM-iXVhQXs4Qeu-axFawUZOPLt31DnA15mJztoDjsMGLaBtAMvSXeT9WVsaoQmhYVfdC82zOAX46jphYNaU4upVvF6aifs5hOhYBfAeBxYla3B7yTdFTPMg5I2PcYn0Rnlpq7Ul3VV3IMV82kzzu-S0CvUR_mNiDcAz7B0jzWelFA9R68B7yOW1l5w1JhdOeEWRn> (thanks for Fatih, David, Frank, Tapio for reviewing) In a nutshell, this adjustment is needed to prepare the path for proper continuous delivery support by projects. Any clarification/questions/discussion can be done over email or at the TSC or release meetings tomorrow. Thank You. Alec _______________________________________________ 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<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1dxIWZ-0001lR-44&i=57e1b682&c=R7OdfA2EBSsHm9SbY5hc-C8dwnEGOjt4nYA7ElDBgySKbftyGpe67Qschd51hzh6wZV76DCP5doA5A6PWVDEBrjhlk7yh0lBUHOPVpqs0f77Fq7bh1TCcqQaYonL7JNqw0ENh9I5iGxdcflcJ4Aq02dUHnOgcUBEPGcPnS_QNLaD-ofYOse-Wz2Z2A9nOZxCbVhtsr4FM_E-_2GQk64YitKPueIRdqkzS5KrBx2vsg7vIYESRDUrgYJ02cD79_3S5JsturUpqApRIE_2ARqvuw> _______________________________________________ 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
