[infra][tc] Container images in openstack/ on Docker Hub

Jay Pipes jaypipes at gmail.com
Mon Jan 28 15:58:24 UTC 2019

On 01/28/2019 10:43 AM, Mohammed Naser wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:41 AM Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 01/28/2019 10:24 AM, Mohammed Naser wrote:
>>> Perhaps, we should come up with the first initial step of providing
>>> a common way of building images (so a use can clone a repo and do
>>> 'docker build .') which will eliminate the obligation of having to
>>> deal with binaries, and then afterwards reconsider the ideal way of
>>> shipping those out.
>> Isn't that precisely what LOCI offers, Mohammed?
>> Best,
>> -jay
> I haven't studied LOCI as much however I think that it would be good to
> perhaps look into bringing that approach in-repo rather than out-of-repo
> so a user can simply git clone, docker build .
> I have to admit, I'm not super familiar with LOCI but as far as I know, that's
> indeed what I believe it does.

Yes, that's what LOCI can do, kinda. :) Technically there's some 
Makefile foo that iterates over projects to build images for, but it's 
essentially what it does.

Alternately, you don't even need to build locally. You can do:

docker build https://git.openstack.org/openstack/loci.git \
   --build-arg PROJECT=keystone \
   --tag keystone:ubuntu

IMHO, the real innovation that LOCI brings is the way that it builds 
wheel packages into an intermediary docker build container and then 
installs the service-specific Python code into a virtualenv inside the 
target project docker container after injecting the built wheels.

That, and LOCI made a good (IMHO) decision to just focus on building the 
images and not deploying those images (using Ansible, Puppet, Chef, k8s, 
whatever). They kept the deployment concerns separate, which is a great 
decision since deployment tools are a complete dumpster fire (all of them).


More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list