Great. I tried to define it briefly in the README:
https://github.com/archlinux/archlinux-docker#purpose I am open to any
suggestions though.
side note: The "release process" is described within a Makefile at
https://github.com/pierres/archiso-manager
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 7:06 PM, Santiago Tor
Understood.
Although I don't exactly know what's the "original purpose" I'll try to
make sure no big radical changes are made without consensus from the
community :)
Thanks both of you!
-Santiago.
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 03:41:56PM +0100, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Yeah, that was the "and please do
Yeah, that was the "and please don't get it the wrong way" part which
obviously did not work. I thought I just put this out there as I
already got PRs and mails from different people who wanted to make the
image more minimal by removing files from packages or provide
different images for all kind o
On 2018-03-12 05:33, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Thanks for digging this up again. You may use the github issue or
> project system to plan the different steps. Also (and please don't get
> it the wrong way) let's keep the purpose I intended for our Docker
> image intact.
No one has suggested changing
Thanks for digging this up again. You may use the github issue or
project system to plan the different steps. Also (and please don't get
it the wrong way) let's keep the purpose I intended for our Docker
image intact.
Greetings,
Pierre
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 12:01 AM, Santiago Torres-Arias via
On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 09:46:48PM +0100, Bartłomiej Piotrowski via
arch-dev-public wrote:
> On 2018-01-29 20:29, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> > * I did not look into the details of how we exactly need to proceed
> > with making an "official" image. A few pull requests or some kind of
> > setp-by-step
On 2018-01-29 20:29, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> * I did not look into the details of how we exactly need to proceed
> with making an "official" image. A few pull requests or some kind of
> setp-by-step plan (wiki or github) would help.
Necrobumping. You actually quoted the message from Santiago that
About the ISO bus factor:
* I just recently put the whole process into a simple script to make
it easier for anybody else to build ISOs. Unfortunately at least the
signing process requires some manual work. See
https://github.com/pierres/archiso-manager
About the official Docker Image:
* The docke
> > The official images projects info is on [1] and [2] if you want to read
> > more in-depth/updated information. I'll summarize here though:
> >
> > 1) A TU/Arch Linux "affiliate" submits a PR to the official images
> > repository, which basically contains the following:
> > 1. A
On 01/29/18 at 12:31pm, Santiago Torres-Arias via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry I've been quite sick (to the point of barely having energy to look
> at the computer). I'm back on my feet now though :)
>
> > > Sangy/Santiago[3] was so nice to speak with the docker guys. They said
> > > th
Hi,
Sorry I've been quite sick (to the point of barely having energy to look
at the computer). I'm back on my feet now though :)
> > Sangy/Santiago[3] was so nice to speak with the docker guys. They said
> > they would approve our docker image and we could move it to the other
> > official images
On 25.01.2018 02:02, Christian Rebischke wrote:
> Isn't this more like a workaround?
> I would really appreciate automated ISO image builds or at least the
> option that more than one person is able to generate these images.
Reducing the bus factor should really be a goal for us, so yes, it's a
wo
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 10:58:48AM +0100, Public mailing list for Arch Linux
development wrote:
> On 21.01.2018 20:50, Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > I would definitly
> > prefer to have the vagrant boxes around the same date as we release our
> > ISO images.
>
> How about let
On 21.01.2018 20:50, Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public wrote:
> I would definitly
> prefer to have the vagrant boxes around the same date as we release our
> ISO images.
How about letting it run every day and adding a quick check to the
script that only starts the build when the iso is avail
On 01/21/2018 02:39 PM, Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public wrote:
> No idea about the bootstrap image. Is there a big difference between the
> bootstrap image and `pacstrap` in some random directory?
There is no difference, the bootstrap image is what you use to pacstrap.
The issue is merely
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 07:41:53PM +0100, Public mailing list for Arch Linux
development wrote:
> It would be probably seen as more "official" if it was mentioned on our
> website.
Absolutly! I will see what I can do to bring that on our website.
> > My first goal has been to add some hypervisor
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 03:23:44PM +0100, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> I'm all for automatic builds, and the improvement where multiple people
> know how the ISO's are build & released. How would we however sign these
> builds? And is the bootstrap image also generated in the same manner?
Well, we ha
On 2018-01-20 20:19, Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public wrote:
> The Arch Linux Vagrant images are currently be build for libvirt and
> virtualbox. We have over 3800 downloads at the moment and slowly
> catching up to the community based arch linux vagrant images.[1]
It would be probably seen
On 01/20/18 at 08:19pm, Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Hello Everybody,
> It's now over a half year ago that I've started working together with
> sangy and pierre on our vagrant and docker images. I would like to give
> you a short update on this topic.
>
>
> The Arch Linux Vagr
19 matches
Mail list logo
