On Thu, 2018-03-22 at 10:22 +0700, Arnaud Rebillout wrote: > On 03/16/2018 04:43 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > >>>> In an ideal world, we should try to convince the docker people to use > >>>> stable APIs (that means using only released non-alpha versions!), > >>> FWIW the engine uses a non-alpha version in recent releases. It seems > >>> to be swarmkit (another dep of engine) which is lagging and using the > >>> alpha version (kind of interesting that that code seems to be ok when > >>> vendored into moby but apparantly not when standalone, I suppose they > >>> use different subsets of the API in different ways). > >> Very interesting point indeed. For more details, here are the versions > >> of containerd vendored by docker: > >> > >> - docker-engine (ie moby): 3fa104f (after v1.0.0) > >> - docker-swarmkit: 29a4dd7 (somewhere between v1.0.0 alpha3 and alpha4) > >> > >> Having both in sync would help for sure. > > I prodded some folks yesteday a lo: > > https://github.com/docker/swarmkit/pull/2560 > > Hey Iann, I noticed that the pull request you mentioned was merged > yesterday in Docker Swarmkit. > > So I gave it a try today, I updated my swarmkit package and tried to > build against the latest stable version of containerd, `1.0.2` at the > time of this writing. Of course, it didn't work ;) > > Swarmkit wants parts of the containerd API that don't exist, and it > started giving me a headache, until I realized what's going on. > > Containerd has a branch 'release/1.0', and that's where the stable > version 1.0 is developed. However, Docker vendors a commit from the > branch 'master', ie. where the unstable version lives. So, even though > this commit is after '1.0', it contains some part of the API that will > be released in containerd '1.1' I guess, and therefore I'm stuck again > with the same choice: either I package a specific version of containerd > for docker, either I wait for a '1.1' release of containerd, in the hope > that Docker can build against it. But it's very likely that it won't > because containerd will be too new then, so I will have to wait for > Docker to update its vendoring bits, and so on, a hopeless and endless > cycle. > > So, in short, it's great that containerd tags its release and has a > stable branch, but it's too bad Docker doesn't use it...
I wasn't aware of that, how strange. I suppose the rationale is that v1.1 will be upwards compatible with v1.0, but still... I'll mention this to some folks internally and see what, if anything, can be done. Ian. _______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
