[scl.org] Image naming for centos-based images

[Ben Parees]

Based on what I've seen on this thread so far, I think there's a general
consensus that:
1) the long form names are useful in certain situations
2) the short form also have value

and as such, we should simply use the alias approach so we can advertise
and reference the images in the most appropriate way for the
context/requirements of different scenarios.

Therefore I'm proceeding with updating the openshift v3 release to assume
the long form names will be available:
https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/5409





On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Daniel Riek <riek at redhat.com> wrote:

> FWITW, I agree with Michal and Honza here.
>
> There were 2 primary reasons to include the Platformdifferentiator:
> * As stated in the policy [1], the primary purpose was to allow builders
> of layered images to understand what underlying platform they would be
> using and give them explicit control.
> * In addition we wanted to ensure that the RHEL name show-up in searches
> (one of the reasons why this is a cert requirement).
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/projectatomic/ContainerApplicationGenericLabels/blob/master/vendor/redhat/names.md
>
> Daniel
>
> On Friday, October 23, 2015, Honza Horak <hhorak at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/22/2015 01:10 PM, Michal Fojtik wrote:
>>
>>> I think the question here is really how we will tag the ruby/python/etc
>>> images then.
>>> Now we deal just with centos7, so we can have centos/ruby-20 (or
>>> centos/ruby even).
>>> How when centos8 will be out, centos/ruby-20 will be based on centos8?
>>> What will happen
>>> to centos7 images? How users will know what base those images have? ;-)
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for rephrasing, that's basically my point all the time. We just
>> need to be able to distinguish it somehow, even if it is crucial only for
>> part of the users and others will ignore it.
>>
>> Honza
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Honza Horak <hhorak at redhat.com
>>> <mailto:hhorak at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     I expect we want the centos-based images be run everywhere, not only
>>>     centos, but on Fedora, Debian or even Windows if possible.
>>>
>>>     Honza
>>>
>>>     On 10/22/2015 12:31 PM, Michal Fojtik wrote:
>>>
>>>         That is good question :-)
>>>
>>>         On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Petr Pisar <ppisar at redhat.com
>>>         <mailto:ppisar at redhat.com>
>>>         <mailto:ppisar at redhat.com <mailto:ppisar at redhat.com>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>              On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:13:43PM +0200, Michal Fojtik
>>> wrote:
>>>              > I think one of the main reason (AFAIK) we used "-rhel7"
>>>         and "-centos7"
>>>              > suffixed for the images
>>>              > was that we simply used one repository ("openshift/") and
>>>         we needed to have
>>>              > a way to distinguish
>>>              > between rhel7 and centos7 images.
>>>              >
>>>              > Now, when we are pushing the images to "centos/"
>>>         namespace on DockerHub,
>>>              > this is not longer required
>>>              > I think, because "centos/ruby-22-centos7" sounds just
>>>         weird :-)
>>>              >
>>>              What will happen once centos8 is released? Do you think
>>>         then executing
>>>              centos8 image on centos7 or vice versa will be supported?
>>>
>>>              -- Petr
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         SCLorg mailing list
>>>         SCLorg at redhat.com <mailto:SCLorg at redhat.com>
>>>         https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/sclorg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Daniel Riek <riek at redhat.com>
> * Sr. Director Systems Design & Engineering
> * Red Hat Inc, Tel. +1-617-863-6776
>
>


-- 
Ben Parees | OpenShift
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/sclorg/attachments/20151026/5cc9429e/attachment.htm>