Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Binary containers with pip install?

[Fox, Kevin M]

+1.

Its relatively easy to write some cron jobs that look at your images and tell 
you want containers have out of date rpms and need upgrading. its much harder 
when there are pip packages/virtualenvs involved. Having a nice way to let ops 
know (or automation know) that there are potential non system packages involved 
brings needed attention to them.

Thanks,
Kevin

From: Jeffrey Zhang [zhang.lei@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 5:38 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Binary containers with pip install?

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Dave Walker <em...@daviey.com> wrote:
>  - Add support to have per project build type, but this is likely a testing
> scenario that cannot be reasonably assured.

I think  this is another feature we can overwrite some variables in
certain image.

>  - Allow source installs in binary containers, but track it as a TODO bug
> "Please package foo" (Launchpad has great support for linking to other bug
> trackers).  Then once this bug is closed, proper binary support can be
> resolved.  This has the benefit of 'best-effort' towards binary, with a
> clear intent to move across.  It also allows more testing of the binary
> parts that are present, with just the source parts as required. (this is my
> favourite)

Love this too.
Maybe we need a WARNING to the stdout to tell the operators.




--
Regards,
Jeffrey Zhang
Blog: http://xcodest.me

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Binary containers with pip install?

[Jeffrey Zhang]

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Dave Walker  wrote:
>  - Add support to have per project build type, but this is likely a testing
> scenario that cannot be reasonably assured.

I think  this is another feature we can overwrite some variables in
certain image.

>  - Allow source installs in binary containers, but track it as a TODO bug
> "Please package foo" (Launchpad has great support for linking to other bug
> trackers).  Then once this bug is closed, proper binary support can be
> resolved.  This has the benefit of 'best-effort' towards binary, with a
> clear intent to move across.  It also allows more testing of the binary
> parts that are present, with just the source parts as required. (this is my
> favourite)

Love this too.
Maybe we need a WARNING to the stdout to tell the operators.




-- 
Regards,
Jeffrey Zhang
Blog: http://xcodest.me

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Binary containers with pip install?

[Dave Walker]

Hi,

The definition of 'source' is quite loose, the way it is currently followed
seems to be OpenStack source - which is not necessarily the project the
Dockerfile is creating.  Ie, mariadb is always installed via binary (and I
don't think this should be changed).

Kolla will (normally) always be able to track other openstack projects
faster than distros can, via source install.  This means that either we
hold the specific project on ice until it is completely ready (likely very
late into the Kolla cycle), or do best effort.

So there are 4 scenarios i can see:
 - Some Dockerfiles output "Sorry, binary isn't supported at this stage"
(or similar).  This means that the deployer has to switch their entire
deployment to type source, meaning that a single project has caused the
user to switch away from binary.  This isn't ideal.
 - Have a single if-logic for the flavor distro (rather than flavor AND
source/binary), so the single logic is built for both scenarios (binary and
source).  The deployer can have a mostly binary build, but have a couple of
hidden source builds (which will be called binary), that can be fixed
if/when support is added.
 - Add support to have per project build type, but this is likely a testing
scenario that cannot be reasonably assured.
 - Allow source installs in binary containers, but track it as a TODO bug
"Please package foo" (Launchpad has great support for linking to other bug
trackers).  Then once this bug is closed, proper binary support can be
resolved.  This has the benefit of 'best-effort' towards binary, with a
clear intent to move across.  It also allows more testing of the binary
parts that are present, with just the source parts as required. (this is my
favourite)

--
Kind Regards,
Dave Walker

On 26 July 2016 at 08:37, Swapnil Kulkarni (coolsvap) 
wrote:

> Dear Kollagues,
>
> There has been a detailed conversation between me and Prithiv related
> to [1] and allowing pip install in binary containers.
>
> Till now we have simply skipped the binary containers till we have
> official packages in respective distro repositories. I strongly feel
> we should be following that.
>
> If someone wishes to have a functionality without a package in the
> base distro, there is always an option to build source containers and
> use it with Kolla.
>
> Thoughs welcome?
>
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/344930/
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Swapnil Kulkarni
> irc : coolsvap
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [kolla] Binary containers with pip install?

[Swapnil Kulkarni (coolsvap)]

Dear Kollagues,

There has been a detailed conversation between me and Prithiv related
to [1] and allowing pip install in binary containers.

Till now we have simply skipped the binary containers till we have
official packages in respective distro repositories. I strongly feel
we should be following that.

If someone wishes to have a functionality without a package in the
base distro, there is always an option to build source containers and
use it with Kolla.

Thoughs welcome?

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/344930/

-- 
Best Regards,
Swapnil Kulkarni
irc : coolsvap

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev