[CentOS-devel] RH patches v/s vanilla docker in CentOS

[Lokesh Mandvekar]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:05:46AM -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 04/21/2015 08:50 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 04/21/2015 08:55 AM, George Dunlap wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 7:06 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar
> >> <lsm5 at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >>> I've pretty much decided that 'docker' in virt SIG would only track upstream
> >>> sources (no RH patches in it). Don't want this to sound like "I don't care
> >>> what anyone says", but docker upstream and many CentOS users want a build
> >>> which will only track upstream docker sources. Having 'docker' in virt SIG to
> >>> be this build sounds like the way to go.
> >> It sounds like you care what "many CentOS users want", which is hardly
> >> "I don't care what anyone says". :-)
> >>
> >> That sounds like a perfectly reasonable decision.
> >>
> >>  -George
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CentOS-devel mailing list
> >> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
> > I have not chimed in on this yet, but the patches include stuff to make
> > docker run better on a
> > systemd based system.  Going purely upstream eliminates us from
> > experimenting and testing
> > some of our ideas.
> > 
> > Current patches include fixes for SELinux, patches to allow systemd to
> > run within a container without
> > requiring --privileged mode.  Handling of multiple registries,  Proper
> > integration into the systemd, MachineCtl, journald.
> > 
> > And most importantly customers running on rhel will have a different
> > experience then on Centos.
> 
> Which is why I thought we want RH type behavior (ie patches) on both our
> fast moving and RHEL Atomic Host downstream branches for C7.  We need
> stuff that works correctly with SELINUX and systemd on CentOS-7.  So,
> IMHO, we want newer docker and RH patches.

Given the conflicting requirements, would it make sense to have appropriate
tags such that, a particular 'docker' (something with RH patches) build only
makes it to atomic, while another 'docker' build makes it to virt7-release
(only upstream docker sources)

I'm guessing now with dist-gits coming up and mapping koji tags to dist-git
branches should make this a lot easier.

We already have virt7-docker-master-el7 (daily rebuilds) and virt7-docker-upstream-el7
(tracking upstream sources), I
guess having a virt7-docker-atomic-el7 (something which atomic hosts could
consume) will solve this problem.

What say?
> 
> 



> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel


-- 
Lokesh
Freenode, OFTC: lsm5
GPG: 0xC7C3A0DD
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20150422/7c47b1c5/attachment.sig>