Hello, Of course I will vote for 1. I consider 2 and 3 as false from a Docker point of view.
Yes we already have published manifests which are suitable solutions to avoid duplicating Dockerfiles and jenkins jobs. Let me know if you want much technical details. I must precise that the choice done by Storperf can't work for Functest Most of our containers depend on a parent which oblige to use external tools instead of releng (they mainly forbid variable in FROM instructions). Cédric 2017-10-13 21:50 GMT+02:00 Alexandru Avadanii <alexandru.avada...@enea.com>: > Hi, Alec, > > Thanks for the vote J > > That is exactly what Cédric implemented for Functest, using manifests. > > > > If we are not to duplicate tags (i.e. choose between #1 and #3), I will vote > for #1 too. > > > > From: Alec Hothan (ahothan) [mailto:ahot...@cisco.com] > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:57 PM > To: Alexandru Avadanii; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Arch-specific Docker tags > > > > > > I would prefer limiting the number of container images because we’re going > to have a lot more image versions for some projects (to tackle versioned > XCI/CD) > > So option 2 does not look great for me. > > I’d vote for option 1. > > > > Have you guys looked at support for multi-arch docker images? > > I find it really interesting and removes the need for an arch specific tag. > > > > http://container-solutions.com/multi-arch-docker-images/ > > > > If we could implement this, that would be even better. > > > > Alec > > > > > > From: <opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org> on behalf of Alexandru > Avadanii <alexandru.avada...@enea.com> > Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 10:04 AM > To: TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Arch-specific Docker tags > > > > Hi, > > Cédric pointed out that Docker uses DEB/kernel format for describing the > architecture of a Docker container. > > To align with this, the Functest Docker tags were updated from > "x86_64-latest"/"aarch64-latest" to "amd64-latest"/"arm64-latest". > > > > Although the arch-naming convention is not enforced to this format (as long > as the manifest points for a specific architecture to a specific tag, that > tag can be named however we want), we agreed that aligning with the Docker > internal format would be a good idea. > > > > My personal preference would be to duplicate the tags, and have both > "x86_64-latest"/"amd64-latest", respectively "aarch64-latest"/"arm64-latest" > point to the same image. > > > > Anyway, I think we should agree on a format at the OPNFV-project level, and > try to use it for all our projects. > > > > So, for multiarch projects that push Docker images, we have at least 3 > options: > > 1. "amd64"/"arm64" tags, aligning with Docker internal naming (currently > used by Functest); > > 2. "amd64" + "x86_64" / "arm64" + "aarch64"; > > 3. "x86_64" / "aarch64" (currently used by Storperf); > > > > Note that if the project provides a manifest, arch-specific tags are more or > less hidden from the end-user, and a simple `docker pull > opnfv/functest-core:latest' (or without a tag) will fetch the image for the > current system arch automatically (amd64-latest or arm64-latest for > Functest). > > > > Thank you, Cédric, for handling this for Functest on such short notice! > > > > BR, > > Alex > > _______________________________________________ > > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > > 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 > _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
