On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 9:13 AM Johannes Kastl <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On 18.04.23 at 09:02 Viktor Ashirov wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 8:15 AM Johannes Kastl <email@example.com> wrote:
>> https://hub.docker.com/r/389ds/dirsrv only has 2.1, 2.2 and latest. 2.2
>> latest are 8 months old.
>> https://quay.io/repository/389ds/dirsrv?tab=tags only has latest and c9s
>> any version tags (or I did not find them?).
>> Would it be possible to publish the tags more often? And maybe publish all
>> versions (2.2.1, 2.2.6, ...) in addition?
> Yes, it's possible.
> Using "latest" or "stable" is not a good idea for container workloads, as
>> does not allow rollbacks in case of errors or changed behaviour. Rolling
>> back is
>> easy using helm charts, but only if the image can be changed back from say
>> to 2.2.5 by helm. When using stable or 2.2 or similar, the new image will
>> fetched and the old one discarded, so it will be lost and no longer usable.
> Yes, that's understandable. As you already found out, we have a split brain
> situation with images in different registries, so I wanted to sort this out
Yes, I found the issue on Github regarding the images. I already commented my ideas.
> But I can tags to quay.io repos.
That would be really nice.
> One thing to keep in mind though: those minor releases might be less
> tested. I chose to follow packages in Fedora rather than 389-ds-base
> versions because these packages go through testing with FreeIPA and OpenQA.
> But I guess with helm and deployments rollback this is less of an issue.
Basically I would like to have **one** usable image with the tags. If this is
based on Fedora, C9s or openSUSE does not matter much to me (remember,
container, I do not need to do anything inside the container normally :-) ). So
if you just follow the Fedora ones as they are tested the most that would be
fine for me.
I agree. Also maintaining different images for different distributions adds maintenance burden. So I'd like to consolidate images and tags, and provide a solution that makes sense.
The setup aka environment variables etc. should be the same on all of the
images, as they are interpreted by the dscontainer binary that comes from
389ds-base if I understood this correct?
At least 2.2.x and 2.3.x have the same dscontainer entrypoint. So yes, they are the same.
Linux Consultant & Trainer
Tel.: +49 (0) 151 2372 5802
B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg
GF: Ralph Dehner
Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537
389-users mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe send an email to email@example.com
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://firstname.lastname@example.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue