Hi all,
After a hiatus for Christmas I've updated the PR for the above
https://github.com/apache/brooklyn-dist/pull/136 to take account of
Richard's comment about having a separate directory.
And while I'm here I'll just wish you all a very Happy New Year! All the
best for 2019.
Geoff
On
Yes I think I'd definitely prefer this. The new UI has brought in lots of
new build prerequisites so there's actually quite a lot you need to do to
get a Brooklyn build today. Since all these extra build packages require
special tooling, and are going to be unused by most people, I'm happy for
I guess we don't *have* to be consistent, or rather we can consistently
stick to the principle of making life as easy as possible for users. But I
do like the thought of people being able to build and try Brooklyn with as
few hoops to jump through as possible, so:
I would certainly stick with
Duncan's point is a good one -
"So we opt out of building the go client, rpm build, and deb build. So this
is a bit inconsistent but I think I'd be happy to merge if a couple more
people respond to the email thread."
I was just thinking the same thing over the weekend - perhaps we should
reverse
Hi Geoff.
The PR looks good but creates an inconsistency between the binaries:
RPM/DEB and Go client are all opt-out whereas the docker build is opt-in.
Whatever route we go, I think we should be consistent across the board.
Since people seems ok with an opt-in solution for the different
Have raised https://github.com/apache/brooklyn-dist/pull/136, let me know
what you think
G
On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 at 17:34 Paul Campbell
wrote:
> +1 to only build docker image when profile is activated
>
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018, 16:34 Geoff Macartney wrote:
>
> > I'll go out on a limb here and
+1 to only build docker image when profile is activated
On Sat, 15 Dec 2018, 16:34 Geoff Macartney I'll go out on a limb here and suggest we disable it by default - let's go
> with Alex's suggestion of a profile to build the image, with the default
> build being NOT to build with that profile,
I've made a start on a PR for this, will try to get something out soonish,
but can't do more on it tonight - off to a Christmas party!
G
On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 at 16:24 Geoff Macartney
wrote:
> I'll go out on a limb here and suggest we disable it by default - let's go
> with Alex's suggestion of
I'll go out on a limb here and suggest we disable it by default - let's go
with Alex's suggestion of a profile to build the image, with the default
build being NOT to build with that profile, so you would have to do
something like
mvn clean install -DdockerImage
to build the image.
any +1s?
Hi Geoff, all.
To recap what this is doing: it builds a docker image that launches
Brooklyn. It actually wraps the RPM that maven builds, and packages that as
a Docker image.
Now, I merged this and when testing, I noticed[1] that the plugin used to
build the docker image can be disabled with one
It should have a mvn profile like rpm and the go cli IMO. The README in the
master project describes these.
Best
Alex
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018, 22:51 Geoff Macartney We added this in https://github.com/apache/brooklyn-dist/pull/118, but I
> do
> dislike having to have Docker to build Brooklyn. IMHO
We added this in https://github.com/apache/brooklyn-dist/pull/118, but I do
dislike having to have Docker to build Brooklyn. IMHO anyone should be
able to build and use Brooklyn without knowing anything about Docker. Could
we remove the image build from the mvn install and have a separate shell
All,
The Apache Brooklyn build depends on having a working Docker instance. This
I did not know.
The build failure happens in the `brooklyn-dist` project, which
incorporates into execution `dockerfile-maven-plugin` which invokes Docker
during the build phase. If Docker is not running, it tries
13 matches
Mail list logo
