-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 49
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
chore: split packages #1496
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
chore: split packages #1496
Conversation
I would second that proposal! |
@kristof-mattei The |
I'd sugguest to use tag (instead of different image) and add README, like:
|
Unfortunately that doesn't fit Docker's treatment of tags. Not passing in a tag implies |
I don't think that is accurate. It is actually quite common to distinguish different configurations of an image via tags. It is even considered bad practice to not supply a tag ("rely on the E.g. the rust images: https://hub.docker.com/_/rust/ there are tags for various ubuntu-flavor as well as alpine-based images. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I just stumbled upon this project with the intention of hosting an instance myself. Another data-point: https://docs.docker.com/develop/dev-best-practices/
|
Hi, First of all thanks for providing this software! Just wanted to check before spending more time on this: Is this pull request still valid and will updated SQL docker images be provided in the proposed or some other way? I'm currently planing to run my own conatiner but having to stick with version 0.13.7 forever wouldn't be a good idea. |
Late reply but I sit corrected. Let me find some time to see how this impacts this PR. Will need to delete those new repo references. Thanks. |
Description
In #1407 the database packages were split, meaning the database choice is now a compilation choice, and thus we need individual packages.
In the PR the only package deployed is the one with
DATABASE_BACKEND=spanner
.This PR changes that. Unfortunately the way Docker works it means we'll need to add 2 repos (as we can't rename old ones).
The proposal is:
Go from 2 repos (
DOCKERHUB_REPO
&UTILS_DOCKERHUB_REPO
) to 3 (DOCKERHUB_REPO_SPANNER
,DOCKERHUB_REPO_MYSQL
&DOCKERHUB_REPO_UTILS
).The package for the Spanner DB would go to the
DOCKERHUB_REPO_SPANNER
, the one for MySQL DB toDOCKERHUB_REPO_MYSQL
, and I did rename the variable for the utils repo fromUTILS_DOCKERHUB_REPO
toDOCKERHUB_REPO_UTILS
to match the same naming structure.That's it. It does not bring
latest
tags for the normal builds. That will go in another PR (should this one be accepted).What needs to be done before merging this in?
Create the following repos in hub.docker.com (names are proposals):
Add the following Environment Variables into CircleCI:
DOCKERHUB_REPO_SPANNER=https://hub.docker.com/r/mozilla/syncstorage-rs-spanner
DOCKERHUB_REPO_MYSQL=https://hub.docker.com/r/mozilla/syncstorage-rs-mysql
DOCKERHUB_REPO_UTILS=https://hub.docker.com/r/mozilla/sync-spanner-py-utils
Ensure the user
$DOCKER_USER
has access to those 3 repos ^ for pushing.And after merging this in?
UTILS_DOCKERHUB_REPO
env var.Testing
Issue(s)
Notes
I copied the following line, as I'm not sure it has meaning (some comment parser?):
https://github.com/mozilla-services/syncstorage-rs/compare/master...kristof-mattei:syncstorage-rs:feature/split-docker-packages?expand=1#diff-78a8a19706dbd2a4425dd72bdab0502ed7a2cef16365ab7030a5a0588927bf47R454
My formatter made the YAML formatting more consistent. There is a view in GitHub to not display those whitespace changes. If this is not desired let me know & I'll patch them out.