CentOS virt - Jun 2016 - [CentOS-devel] docker and docker-latest packages on CentOS Virt SIG

Moving this discussion to centos-virt@ as it's upto the SIG to decide on
how this moves ahead.

I'm hoping to have 2 new koji tag sets:

virt7-docker-fedora-* (will have fedora rpms rebuilt)
virt7-docker-el-* (will have rhel candidate builds before they are released
or land in centos extras)

The -el-* repos will help to have Virt SIG as sort of an upstream and early QA 
for both RHEL and CentOS extras.

If the SIG is ok with it, I'll check with CBS guys to create these 2 tags.

See below message to centos-devel@ and
http://centos-devel.1051824.n5.nabble.com/CentOS-devel-docker-and-docker-latest-packages-on-CentOS-Virt-SIG-td5712734.html
for background


----- Forwarded message from Lokesh Mandvekar <lsm5 at fedoraproject.org>
-----
> I could potentially build both upcoming RHEL and Fedora rpms for Virt.
> 
> We could have koji tag separation like:
> 
> virt7-docker-rhel-*
> virt7-docker-fedora-*
> 
> and maybe then deprecate the virt7-docker-common-* in favor of the two
> above?? That could ensure clear separation between the 2 versions.
> 
> Enabling both rhel and fedora repos and then upgrading docker from the
fedora
> repo with a docker-latest pre-installed can and will give you nightmares,
but as
> a close friend always says, "We'll cross that bridge..."
> 
> wdyt?
> 
Thanks,

-- 
Lokesh
Freenode: lsm5
GPG: 0xC7C3A0DD
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/attachments/20160610/46346c59/attachment-0006.sig>

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar
<lsm5 at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Moving this discussion to centos-virt@ as it's upto the SIG to decide
on
> how this moves ahead.
>
> I'm hoping to have 2 new koji tag sets:
>
> virt7-docker-fedora-* (will have fedora rpms rebuilt)
> virt7-docker-el-* (will have rhel candidate builds before they are released
> or land in centos extras)
>
> The -el-* repos will help to have Virt SIG as sort of an upstream and early
QA
> for both RHEL and CentOS extras.
>
> If the SIG is ok with it, I'll check with CBS guys to create these 2
tags.
>
> See below message to centos-devel@ and
>
http://centos-devel.1051824.n5.nabble.com/CentOS-devel-docker-and-docker-latest-packages-on-CentOS-Virt-SIG-td5712734.html
> for background
I think having the RHEL version makes sense; but I'm not sure exactly
what we gain from having a version labelled "fedora".  If someone
wanted the Fedora docker, why wouldn't they just install Fedora?  And
if in this case "Fedora" really just stands for "Recently stable
docker", then we should probably just come up with another name for it
that describes it better (even if in the end it turns out to be a
straight re-building of the Fedora RPM).

 -George

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 6:39 AM, George Dunlap <dunlapg at umich.edu>
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar
> <lsm5 at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>> Moving this discussion to centos-virt@ as it's upto the SIG to
decide on
>> how this moves ahead.
>>
>> I'm hoping to have 2 new koji tag sets:
>>
>> virt7-docker-fedora-* (will have fedora rpms rebuilt)
>> virt7-docker-el-* (will have rhel candidate builds before they are
released
>> or land in centos extras)
>>
>> The -el-* repos will help to have Virt SIG as sort of an upstream and
early QA
>> for both RHEL and CentOS extras.
>>
>> If the SIG is ok with it, I'll check with CBS guys to create these
2 tags.
>>
>> See below message to centos-devel@ and
>>
http://centos-devel.1051824.n5.nabble.com/CentOS-devel-docker-and-docker-latest-packages-on-CentOS-Virt-SIG-td5712734.html
>> for background
>
> I think having the RHEL version makes sense; but I'm not sure exactly
> what we gain from having a version labelled "fedora".  If someone
> wanted the Fedora docker, why wouldn't they just install Fedora?  And
> if in this case "Fedora" really just stands for "Recently
stable
> docker", then we should probably just come up with another name for it
> that describes it better (even if in the end it turns out to be a
> straight re-building of the Fedora RPM).
I pesonally do this kind of backporting, a *lot* with Perl and Python
modules. They're often sadly out of date on a RHEL production grade
system, but switching to a Fedora base for your production
environments can get really flakey, really fast due to the immense
churn of that operating system.