On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:55 AM, Srinivas Naga Kotaru (skotaru) < [email protected]> wrote:
> We’re thinking what is the best approach for our code deployment and > promotion. > > This is our proposed flow for each approach > > Docker build: ( Outside of Openshift) > ============================== > > Eclipse —> Git —> Jenkins to build and create artifacts —> Jenkins Docker > Plug-in to create image and push to corporate repo —> oc import-image and > oc deploy —latest > > Basically build & Image creation happening out side of Openshift. > > OpenShift native: > ============== > > Eclipse —> GIT —> Jenkins to build artifacts —> OC Binary deploy by CI/CD > tool against each app as CI/CD has admin access to each project > > We have 2 choices here a) binary build for each life cycle b) build for > dev life cycle and promote using docker tag and push to other life cycles. > Option B make more sense naturally > > This approach using native openshift for build and deployments. Also using > openshift internal registries to store final build images for each life > cycle. > > Can you comment on each pros and cons? From scaling ( hundred thousand > deployments) as well as easy to operate and maintain. Whatever approach it > should be repeatable and reliable without errors since we will automate > everything as part of CI/CD pipeline. > The obvious advantage to building images inside openshift is that you get resource reuse from your openshift cluster. If you perform image builds outside openshift, you effectively need a separate build farm that can perform docker builds. > > Thanks in advance and appreciated feedback > > -- > *SrinivasKotaru* > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users > > -- Ben Parees | OpenShift
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshiftmm/listinfo/users
