On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 9:12 AM Marcin Juszkiewicz <marcin.juszkiewicz@linaro.org> wrote:
W dniu 05.05.2020 o 15:56, Bogdan Dobrelya pisze:
Let's for a minute imagine that each of the raised concerns is addressable. And as a thought experiment, let's put here WHAT has to be addressed for Kolla w/o the need of abandoning it for a custom tooling:
1) input image (centos/ubi0/ubuntu/clear/whatever)
* support ubi8 base images
"kolla-build --base-image ubi8" has you covered. Or you can provide a patch which will switch to ubi8 for some of existing targets. Easy, really.
Yea my list wasn't saying kolla had deficiencies for anything, but rather the core concepts that are needed for something like this. Infact kolla does tick the boxes for all of these however may be opinionated in some areas (e.g. building has to use docker) which may not make sense for others to consume. It might also not be in the best interest of the project to actually push support for alternative solutions if there isn't a larger demand from the community.
2) Packaging method for the application (source/rpm/dpkg/magic)
* abstract away all the packaging methods (at least above the base image) to some (better?) DSL perhaps
What is DSL? Digital Subscriber Line? Did Something Likeable? Droids Supporting Legacy?
domain-specific language. The proposal kinda includes something to that effect that lets us define a yaml with a specific structure which gets turned into a dockerfile equivalent.
I decided to not follow rest of discussion. Let you guys invent something interesting and working. I can just follow then.
Yea I feel like we're going in circles now. Feel free to follow the spec and if it makes sense to contribute it elsewhere or move it we can discuss that later. Right now we're working on something that we think addresses our specific needs without having to re-write significant portions of other projects and impacting everyone. It may not make sense for everyone, but we're investigating it for V. Thanks, -Alex