[GitHub] nifi issue #3038: [NIFI-5646] Dockerfile.alpine: Added.

[apiri]

Github user apiri commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/3038
  
@MikeThomsen We (certain folks on the PMC) have some good flexibility with 
performing releases to Docker Hub.  I think the Alpine addition is certainly 
fine and the tagging makes sense.  Likely don't need the full breadth of 
offerings that JDK has (https://hub.docker.com/r/library/openjdk/tags/) but 
establishing a similar taxonomy would be my preference.  That, in conjunction 
with helper scripts, would allow us to a bit more seamlessly automate this 
process for those that have push access to the repositories.


---

[GitHub] nifi issue #3038: [NIFI-5646] Dockerfile.alpine: Added.

[MikeThomsen]

Github user MikeThomsen commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/3038
  
@apiri What do you think?

> An alternative would be to put the Dockerfiles into subdirectories if the 
above is a limitation in the plugin.

I think an alpine build would be a nice thing to have.


---

[GitHub] nifi issue #3038: [NIFI-5646] Dockerfile.alpine: Added.

[jpds]

Github user jpds commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/3038
  
@MikeThomsen Yes, I had a look at 
https://github.com/spotify/docker-maven-plugin when I had added the 
`dockermaven` image but I couldn't find a way from the documentation to give 
the plugin the different Dockerfile image (akin to the `-f` flag of `docker 
build`).


---