[Container-tools] Why do we have "rhel-docker-eclipse"?

[Scott McCarty]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pete Muir" <pmuir at redhat.com>
> To: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <manderse at redhat.com>
> Cc: "container-tools" <container-tools at redhat.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 4:38:15 AM
> Subject: Re: [Container-tools] Why do we have "rhel-docker-eclipse"?
> 
> +1 have a default Vagrantfile, and then some quickstarts that include
> others as *examples* (i.e. part of docs). This clearly communicates
> intent and also support liability.

+1, I just ran through the install this weekend and I think rhel-ose is the 80% right choice. If you want to learn Kubernetes: 80%, if you want to learn OSE: 80%, if you want to build an app: 80% (you have Docker and OSE).

> 
> On 15 February 2016 at 07:54, Max Rydahl Andersen
> <manderse at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 12 Feb 2016, at 21:59, Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote:
> >
> > On Feb 6, 2016, at 4:01 PM, Burr Sutter bsutter at redhat.com wrote:
> >
> > One Vagrantfile would best from a user experience perspective.
> >
> > The RHEL team really want an option that “turns off Openshift” and
> > “turns on
> > pure Kubernetes” Now, this k8s user is definitely more “hardcore”
> > and he/she
> > would be comfortable with some work on the linux command line to
> > perform
> > this trick.
> >
> > Can we have one Vagrantfile that defaults to a “docker + oc”
> > experience and
> > offers a command line switch to go to pure k8s?
> >
> > I believe it is better to have a Vagrantfile up front and center
> > starts the
> > preferred environment, in this case, OpenShift and additional
> > Vagrantfiles
> > that do other things available or easily created from
> > documentation.
> >
> > A user who doesn't want what the project considers the default is
> > going to
> > get annoyed pretty quickly at having to always boot what they don't
> > want
> > just so that they can turn on what they want and sit through
> > another
> > provisioning cycle.
> >
> > There is no single "correct" Vagrantfile in my opinion. Our
> > simplification
> > efforts will pay big dividends, but we shouldn't try to solve it
> > all in one
> > "mother" file.
> >
> > It might be there is not a single vagrant file that can handle
> > everything
> > and the kitchensink, but
> > there is one vagrant file that is more right than the others - and
> > that is
> > the default experience
> > we want majority of our users to have on first download/usage of
> > the CDK.
> >
> > That is what Burr is referring to above around one Vagrantfile -
> > having a
> > simple and consistent
> > out of box experience.
> >
> > I thought this was what we agreed on last week ?
> >
> > A) Delete the rhel-docker-eclipse (since it is badly named - it has
> > nothing
> > to do with eclipse)
> > B) One Vagrantfile to be in the zip distro for users to use
> > C) Other vagrant files in docs or in a "misc" folder.
> >
> > /max
> > http://about.me/maxandersen
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Container-tools mailing list
> > Container-tools at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/container-tools
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Container-tools mailing list
> Container-tools at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/container-tools
> 

-- 
Scott McCarty, RHCA
Technical Product Marketing: Containers
Email: smccarty at redhat.com
Phone: 312-660-3535
Cell: 330-807-1043
Web: http://crunchtools.com

Containerizing? Why does the user space matter? http://red.ht/1Kl0mpx