Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-26 Thread Tzafrir Cohen 
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 10:03:56AM -0500, Leif Madsen wrote:
> Absolutely! You would do that with an ENV (environment variable) setting in
> the Dockerfile. Once that was setup, you can override that at build time
> (basically you set a "default" value, and then you can override it from the
> docker build command when you're building the container image).
> 
> So phase 1 is actually already dead. I've been busy working on a
> provisioning platform the last two weeks (on top of being sick), but I'm
> through enough of it that I should be able to get to my phase 2 blog post
> this week (ideally this afternoon).
> 
> The preferred approach (as mentioned in my phase 1 blog post) is to
> actually base on an RPM package. One of the issues was just trying to deal
> with fedpkg (which is an awesome system btw) and getting custom changes,
> and whatever version of Asterisk you wanted.

I personally prefer git-buildpackage. RPM support is now getting merged
into the main tree. If you want to easily maintain patches in a patch
queue in a git repository, it may come in handy.

My current tree:

 http://git.xorcom.com/?p=rpm/asterisk.git

Includes the Opus codec patch (thanks for all those who keep help
maintain it).

-- 
   Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755  jabber:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
+972-50-7952406   mailto:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
http://www.xorcom.com

-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-25 Thread Leif Madsen 
Absolutely! You would do that with an ENV (environment variable) setting in
the Dockerfile. Once that was setup, you can override that at build time
(basically you set a "default" value, and then you can override it from the
docker build command when you're building the container image).

So phase 1 is actually already dead. I've been busy working on a
provisioning platform the last two weeks (on top of being sick), but I'm
through enough of it that I should be able to get to my phase 2 blog post
this week (ideally this afternoon).

The preferred approach (as mentioned in my phase 1 blog post) is to
actually base on an RPM package. One of the issues was just trying to deal
with fedpkg (which is an awesome system btw) and getting custom changes,
and whatever version of Asterisk you wanted.

I've solved this with FPM and a companion container. More in the blog post,
but basically the essence is that you run a docker build command in your
local Asterisk source directory, it compiles it and packages it into an RPM
that is stored back on your local host. Then you run one more docker build
command to install that RPM into your Asterisk container image, and the
result is your own custom Asterisk container image with your local mods (or
custom menuselect flags, etc).

It's pretty slick actually, and solves a lot of the problems I was having
with my original approach. Thanks to Alan Graham who pointed out an
excellent Git repo that builds the RPMs using FPM with minimal effort.

Thanks!
Leif.


On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Corey Farrell  wrote:

> Leif,
>
> Thanks for explaining I should have read your blog post before replying to
> Jared's email about the RPM's.  I didn't realize EPEL was that strict with
> version freezes to stay with a no longer supported version.
>
> I do not know too much about Docker yet but I took a look anyways.  Can
> variables be used in Dockerfile.asterisk?  The idea is to be able to use a
> new version of Asterisk without having to update the version on 40 lines.
> Also when someone forks your GIT repo to add/remove packages from the
> install list, they won't face 'git rebase' conflicts after you update the
> version.
>
> Thanks,
> Corey
>
> On Thursday, November 19, 2015, Leif Madsen  wrote:
>
>> Hey Corey!
>>
>> The way it works is that major versions of Asterisk (and same with other
>> packages) are associated with specific releases of Fedora and RHEL, which
>> means the major versions are "stuck" to those releases.
>>
>> However, you can still build the newer version of Asterisk by pulling the
>> spec file and sources from later Fedora versions (Fedora 23 for instance).
>>
>> You can rebuild the RPMs supplied using fedpkg, as I've done in phase 1
>> of my blog post. There are other ways you can do it was well, like with
>> mock etc.
>>
>> (You'll need some dependencies in order to build everything).
>>
>> If you look at my buildit.sh script, it provides the primitives for
>> building the dependencies. I'm doing this via a local build with rpmbuild
>> (because the script is run in the Docker container), but you could also
>> replace this with a fedpkg mock build which would build the RPMs in the
>> chroot for you. There might be some things that are slightly more
>> complicated in that method, because you'd have to get the resulting
>> dependency RPMs into the chroot (possible, it's just not super straight
>> forward if you haven't done it before).
>>
>> I'd probably still suggest doing it in the Docker container, simply
>> because it's super simple to get things spun up. You can even use the
>> local.repo file I'm providing as well. Basically everything you need to
>> build Asterisk for your platform (Red Hat based) is in the repo linked
>> above.
>>
>> Note: this won't work on CentOS 6. There are some oddities with CentOS 6
>> in Docker that resulted in me not being able to build Asterisk in the
>> CentOS 6 container (gcc complained about not being able to result in a
>> binary or something).
>>
>> Long story short, use fedpkg to build the RPMs from the Fedora
>> repositories. Just clone the Fedora 23 version (which gets you Asterisk
>> 13.3.2 as of now), and then build it on top of the system you want (CentOS
>> 6 or 7 for example).
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Leif.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Corey Farrell  wrote:
>> >
>> > Jared,
>> >
>> > I just looked through the EPEL website at EPEL6 and EPEL7, only found
>> > Asterisk 1.8.  Can you point me to the spec file you are using or  an
>> > SRPM?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Corey
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Jared Smith 
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Matthew Jordan 
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Would it be appropriate to summarize the current state of things as
>> "we
>> > >> need a spec file for Asterisk"?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > At one point, there was an awful .spec file in the

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-24 Thread Corey Farrell 
I make use of a couple patches so the latest Fedora spec is a good enough
base for me.  If other people want to see current binaries for EPEL
hopefully they'll speak up.  I had a chance to look over the asterisk.spec
from Fedora master, I have a couple comments.

* res_ari_mailboxes.so should be moved to the asterisk-mwi-external
sub-package.  It has always depended on res_stasis_mailboxes but that
wasn't listed in menuselect until very recently.

* I don't like that the config files are split across sub-packages.  Having
a dedicated sub-package for all configs makes it easier to have another
package (like a web gui) provide /etc/asterisk.  This would also make it
easier to have a config package for "Super Awesome Company".  I realize
this comment is unlikely to go anywhere, but had to mention it anyways.

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015, Jared Smith 
wrote:

>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Leif Madsen  > wrote:
>
>> The way it works is that major versions of Asterisk (and same with other
>> packages) are associated with specific releases of Fedora and RHEL, which
>> means the major versions are "stuck" to those releases.
>
>
>
> If it's easier, I'd be happy to setup some repositories for newer versions
> of Asterisk on RHEL/CentOS 6 and RHEL/CentOS 7.
>
> --
> Jared Smith
>
-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-24 Thread Jared Smith 
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Leif Madsen  wrote:

> The way it works is that major versions of Asterisk (and same with other
> packages) are associated with specific releases of Fedora and RHEL, which
> means the major versions are "stuck" to those releases.



If it's easier, I'd be happy to setup some repositories for newer versions
of Asterisk on RHEL/CentOS 6 and RHEL/CentOS 7.

--
Jared Smith
-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-19 Thread Jared Smith 
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Matthew Jordan  wrote:

> Would it be appropriate to summarize the current state of things as "we
> need a spec file for Asterisk"?



At one point, there was an awful .spec file in the Asterisk sources...
hopefully it's not around any more.

That being said, I just took over as the main maintainer/contact for the
Asterisk packages in Fedora/EPEL -- It's one of the most complicated spec
files in Fedora, but that obviously hasn't scared me off.

I'd love feedback on things we can do to make those packages better, and
get a tighter feedback loop between the Asterisk development community and
the packagers in Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/etc.

--
Jared Smith

--
Jared Smith
-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-19 Thread Corey Farrell 
Jared,

I just looked through the EPEL website at EPEL6 and EPEL7, only found
Asterisk 1.8.  Can you point me to the spec file you are using or  an
SRPM?

Thanks,
Corey

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Jared Smith  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Matthew Jordan  wrote:
>>
>> Would it be appropriate to summarize the current state of things as "we
>> need a spec file for Asterisk"?
>
>
>
> At one point, there was an awful .spec file in the Asterisk sources...
> hopefully it's not around any more.
>
> That being said, I just took over as the main maintainer/contact for the
> Asterisk packages in Fedora/EPEL -- It's one of the most complicated spec
> files in Fedora, but that obviously hasn't scared me off.
>
> I'd love feedback on things we can do to make those packages better, and get
> a tighter feedback loop between the Asterisk development community and the
> packagers in Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/etc.
>
> --
> Jared Smith
>
> --
> Jared Smith
>
> --
> _
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-dev mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-19 Thread Leif Madsen 
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Matthew Jordan  wrote:

>
> 
>
>
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards > > wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards <
 asterisk@sedwards.com> wrote:
 >
 > On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
 >
 >> I wrote up a lengthy blog post that likely borders on ranting:
 >>
 >>
 http://blog.leifmadsen.com/blog/2015/11/10/asterisk-docker-container-phase-1/
 >
 >

>>>
> Great blog post :-)
>
> Would it be appropriate to summarize the current state of things as "we
> need a spec file for Asterisk"?
>
>
Yes, that would be fair. Good thing Alan Graham pointed me at a project
that will build one for us pretty simply from the source directory. I need
to work on another blog post, but basically I have sorted out the main
sticking points, and it doesn't require the Fedora .spec file at all. I'm
trying to work with tools that will generate the package, simply for the
purposes of getting it into the Docker container image (it's probably not
appropriate for further distribution as a "de facto" image, but that's
another problem to solve at another time).


>
> Just to address Steve's point:
>
> Packages aren't going anywhere. I do think we can all agree that the state
> of Asterisk packaging could use some improvement, but that's a separate
> discussion.
>
> Docker is another way to deploy Asterisk, that may or may not use
> packages. (And as Chad pointed out, we're using Docker here at Digium for
> that purpose.) As Leif mentioned in his blog post, there's definitely
> benefits to using packages with Docker, as it reduces the size of the
> Docker images. If the goal is to have a universally accepted Docker file
> for the Asterisk project, then it probably make sense to use packages; that
> would necessitate either having dependable packages for a variety of
> distros, or include a .spec file with the project.
>
> Leif: Does that sound correct?
>
>
Yes that does sound correct, and you're right that *my* goal is to provide
a Dockerfile that can be shipped with the Asterisk source. In my adventures
earlier this week, I found a project that uses Docker to package up the
Asterisk source that you're running from (which means you can generate a
package for the source you've modified, if that's your thing), and then use
the resulting package as the basis of your Asterisk container image you're
going to build.

This is VERY useful when you start wanting to avoid having to modify spec
files for every change you make, or every version of Asterisk, meaning that
a good chunk, if not the entire process, could be automated. This is good
news, because then the Asterisk project could actually use these files to
generate "official" Docker container images. We're not that far yet, but I
don't think we're far off.

Hopefully tomorrow I can spend an hour or so working on a phase 2 blog
post, and then start learning how to submit some files back to the project
:)

Here is a preview of the workflow (copy / pasta of the README.md I created):

# Building Asterisk into a Docker Container Image

Build the package container image. This uses FPM so no `spec` files and
such are
necessary.
```
docker build --pull -f contrib/docker/Dockerfile.packager -t asterisk-build
.
```

Build the Asterisk RPM from the resulting container image.
```
docker run -ti -v $(pwd):/application:ro -v $(pwd)/out:/build -w
/application asterisk-build /application/contrib/docker/make-package.sh
13.6.0
```

Now create your own Asterisk container image from the resulting RPM.
```
docker build --rm -t madsen/asterisk:13.6.0-1 -f
contrib/docker/Dockerfile.asterisk .
```


--
Leif Madsen
Director of Engineering, Product Development
http://avoxi.com
-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-19 Thread Matthew Jordan 



> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards 
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards 
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I wrote up a lengthy blog post that likely borders on ranting:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> http://blog.leifmadsen.com/blog/2015/11/10/asterisk-docker-container-phase-1/
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
Great blog post :-)

Would it be appropriate to summarize the current state of things as "we
need a spec file for Asterisk"?



> > I've only read the first x paragraphs (I'll read more later), and I hope
>>> I'm not flying off the handle.
>>> >
>>> > I used to make source level changes for some of my projects.
>>> Fortunately, all the functionality I now need is provided by the RPMs.
>>> >
>>> > All of my current clients are 'from packages' and I'd hate for the
>>> results of the referenced poll to lead to the demise of the packages.
>>>
>>
>> On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what "demise" you're talking about.
>>>
>>
>> This is why I prefaced my post with 'I hope I'm not flying off the
>> handle.'
>>
>> The potential 'demise' I referred to would be for someone to read your
>> post and apply the results from a single poll with a specific demographic
>> to the general demographic.
>>
>> There is also no "poll" going on...
>>>
>>
>> 'Referenced' is past tense -- referring to the poll you referenced.
>>
>> Nothing that I'm doing will stop people from building packages, so I'm
>>> really confused by your statement.
>>>
>>
>> I get that containers do not preclude people from building packages. I
>> was not commenting on your work, only on the statement 'no one really uses
>> packages.'
>>
>> Not one thing I am proposing will change your workflow.
>>>
>>
>> I look forward to reading your post in depth when I have the time.
>>
>> Sorry for the kerfuffle.
>> 
>>
>
Just to address Steve's point:

Packages aren't going anywhere. I do think we can all agree that the state
of Asterisk packaging could use some improvement, but that's a separate
discussion.

Docker is another way to deploy Asterisk, that may or may not use packages.
(And as Chad pointed out, we're using Docker here at Digium for that
purpose.) As Leif mentioned in his blog post, there's definitely benefits
to using packages with Docker, as it reduces the size of the Docker images.
If the goal is to have a universally accepted Docker file for the Asterisk
project, then it probably make sense to use packages; that would
necessitate either having dependable packages for a variety of distros, or
include a .spec file with the project.

Leif: Does that sound correct?

Matt

-- 
Matthew Jordan
Digium, Inc. | Director of Technology
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA
Check us out at: http://digium.com & http://asterisk.org
-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-19 Thread Leif Madsen 
Hey Corey!

The way it works is that major versions of Asterisk (and same with other
packages) are associated with specific releases of Fedora and RHEL, which
means the major versions are "stuck" to those releases.

However, you can still build the newer version of Asterisk by pulling the
spec file and sources from later Fedora versions (Fedora 23 for instance).

You can rebuild the RPMs supplied using fedpkg, as I've done in phase 1 of
my blog post. There are other ways you can do it was well, like with mock
etc.

(You'll need some dependencies in order to build everything).

If you look at my buildit.sh script, it provides the primitives for
building the dependencies. I'm doing this via a local build with rpmbuild
(because the script is run in the Docker container), but you could also
replace this with a fedpkg mock build which would build the RPMs in the
chroot for you. There might be some things that are slightly more
complicated in that method, because you'd have to get the resulting
dependency RPMs into the chroot (possible, it's just not super straight
forward if you haven't done it before).

I'd probably still suggest doing it in the Docker container, simply because
it's super simple to get things spun up. You can even use the local.repo
file I'm providing as well. Basically everything you need to build Asterisk
for your platform (Red Hat based) is in the repo linked above.

Note: this won't work on CentOS 6. There are some oddities with CentOS 6 in
Docker that resulted in me not being able to build Asterisk in the CentOS 6
container (gcc complained about not being able to result in a binary or
something).

Long story short, use fedpkg to build the RPMs from the Fedora
repositories. Just clone the Fedora 23 version (which gets you Asterisk
13.3.2 as of now), and then build it on top of the system you want (CentOS
6 or 7 for example).

Thanks!
Leif.

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Corey Farrell  wrote:
>
> Jared,
>
> I just looked through the EPEL website at EPEL6 and EPEL7, only found
> Asterisk 1.8.  Can you point me to the spec file you are using or  an
> SRPM?
>
> Thanks,
> Corey
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Jared Smith 
wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Matthew Jordan 
wrote:
> >>
> >> Would it be appropriate to summarize the current state of things as "we
> >> need a spec file for Asterisk"?
> >
> >
> >
> > At one point, there was an awful .spec file in the Asterisk sources...
> > hopefully it's not around any more.
> >
> > That being said, I just took over as the main maintainer/contact for the
> > Asterisk packages in Fedora/EPEL -- It's one of the most complicated
spec
> > files in Fedora, but that obviously hasn't scared me off.
> >
> > I'd love feedback on things we can do to make those packages better,
and get
> > a tighter feedback loop between the Asterisk development community and
the
> > packagers in Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/etc.
>

--
Leif Madsen
Director of Engineering, Product Development
http://avoxi.com
-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-17 Thread Chad McElligott 
Hey Leif,

The Respoke team here at Digium has been doing quite a bit of work with
Docker lately, and we have shared a few Dockerfiles up on Docker Hub[1] as
well.

The goal for our work seems to have a different target than yours, though.
While you are working to make building packages suitable for deployment
easier, we are actually aiming to deploy the docker containers we build to
production.

The scope of our initial work has been to focus on a set of images to make
deploying asterisk with chan_respoke as easy as possible. Our pjsip[2]
image has a customization to increase the maximum number of allowed ice
candidates pjsip will support. Our asterisk[3] image builds on our custom
pjsip image, utilizes the basic-pbx "Super Awesome Company" as its default
set of configs, and supports easy customization of all config files by
automatically parsing any jinja2 templates placed in /etc/asterisk/.
Finally, our chan_respoke[4] image builds on our asterisk image.

All of these images build from source and are versioned. We are currently
focused on the bleeding edge at the moment, with images built for pjsip
2.4.5 and asterisk 13.5.0 & 13.6.0. We haven't spent any time concerning
ourselves about image size, but there's certainly room for improvement on
that front.

David Lee also has done some preliminary work to facilitate development of
Asterisk & chan_respoke in a project "asterisk-docker-dev" on his
Github[5]. Using this project is my primary means of development on
chan_respoke, since it currently only builds on linux and my primary
development machine is a mac.

Even though our goals seems to be different, we're definitely looking
forward to seeing what you come up with in your work with Asterisk and
Docker. Docker has proven so far to be a huge boon and we are excited to
see more adoption in the Asterisk community.

[1]: https://hub.docker.com/u/respoke/dashboard/
[2]: https://github.com/respoke/pjsip-docker
[3]: https://github.com/respoke/asterisk-docker
[4]: https://github.com/respoke/chan_respoke-docker
[5]: https://github.com/leedm777/asterisk-docker-dev

--
Chad McElligott
Software Developer on the Respoke Team
Respoke is a service of Digium, Inc.
cmcellig...@digium.com | www.respoke.io

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards 
wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
>> >
>> >> I wrote up a lengthy blog post that likely borders on ranting:
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://blog.leifmadsen.com/blog/2015/11/10/asterisk-docker-container-phase-1/
>> >
>> >
>> > I've only read the first x paragraphs (I'll read more later), and I
>> hope I'm not flying off the handle.
>> >
>> > I used to make source level changes for some of my projects.
>> Fortunately, all the functionality I now need is provided by the RPMs.
>> >
>> > All of my current clients are 'from packages' and I'd hate for the
>> results of the referenced poll to lead to the demise of the packages.
>>
>
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what "demise" you're talking about.
>>
>
> This is why I prefaced my post with 'I hope I'm not flying off the handle.'
>
> The potential 'demise' I referred to would be for someone to read your
> post and apply the results from a single poll with a specific demographic
> to the general demographic.
>
> There is also no "poll" going on...
>>
>
> 'Referenced' is past tense -- referring to the poll you referenced.
>
> Nothing that I'm doing will stop people from building packages, so I'm
>> really confused by your statement.
>>
>
> I get that containers do not preclude people from building packages. I was
> not commenting on your work, only on the statement 'no one really uses
> packages.'
>
> Not one thing I am proposing will change your workflow.
>>
>
> I look forward to reading your post in depth when I have the time.
>
> Sorry for the kerfuffle.
>
>
> --
> Thanks in advance,
> -
> Steve Edwards   sedwa...@sedwards.com  Voice: +1-760-468-3867 PST
>
> --
> _
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-dev mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
>
-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-16 Thread Leif Madsen 
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards 
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
>
>> I wrote up a lengthy blog post that likely borders on ranting:
>>
>>
http://blog.leifmadsen.com/blog/2015/11/10/asterisk-docker-container-phase-1/
>
>
> I've only read the first x paragraphs (I'll read more later), and I hope
I'm not flying off the handle.
>
> I used to make source level changes for some of my projects. Fortunately,
all the functionality I now need is provided by the RPMs.
>
> All of my current clients are 'from packages' and I'd hate for the
results of the referenced poll to lead to the demise of the packages.

I'm not sure what "demise" you're talking about. There is also no "poll"
going on, but rather feedback on building containers for Asterisk in the
most flexible way possible.

Nothing that I'm doing will stop people from building packages, so I'm
really confused by your statement. Not one thing I am proposing will change
your workflow.

--
Leif Madsen
Director of Engineering, Product Development
http://avoxi.com
-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-16 Thread Steve Edwards 

On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:


I wrote up a lengthy blog post that likely borders on ranting: 

http://blog.leifmadsen.com/blog/2015/11/10/asterisk-docker-container-phase-1/


I've only read the first x paragraphs (I'll read more later), and I hope 
I'm not flying off the handle.


I used to make source level changes for some of my projects. Fortunately, 
all the functionality I now need is provided by the RPMs.


All of my current clients are 'from packages' and I'd hate for the results 
of the referenced poll to lead to the demise of the packages.


--
Thanks in advance,
-
Steve Edwards   sedwa...@sedwards.com  Voice: +1-760-468-3867 PST-- 
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Re: [asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

2015-11-16 Thread Steve Edwards 

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards  
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
>
>> I wrote up a lengthy blog post that likely borders on ranting:
>>
>> http://blog.leifmadsen.com/blog/2015/11/10/asterisk-docker-container-phase-1/
>
>
> I've only read the first x paragraphs (I'll read more later), and I hope I'm 
not flying off the handle.
>
> I used to make source level changes for some of my projects. Fortunately, all 
the functionality I now need is provided by the RPMs.
>
> All of my current clients are 'from packages' and I'd hate for the results of 
the referenced poll to lead to the demise of the packages.


On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:


I'm not sure what "demise" you're talking about.


This is why I prefaced my post with 'I hope I'm not flying off the 
handle.'


The potential 'demise' I referred to would be for someone to read your 
post and apply the results from a single poll with a specific demographic 
to the general demographic.



There is also no "poll" going on...


'Referenced' is past tense -- referring to the poll you referenced.

Nothing that I'm doing will stop people from building packages, so I'm 
really confused by your statement.


I get that containers do not preclude people from building packages. I was 
not commenting on your work, only on the statement 'no one really uses 
packages.'



Not one thing I am proposing will change your workflow.


I look forward to reading your post in depth when I have the time.

Sorry for the kerfuffle.

--
Thanks in advance,
-
Steve Edwards   sedwa...@sedwards.com  Voice: +1-760-468-3867 PST

--
_
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
  http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev