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

Fri Apr 17 15:40:40 UTC 2015
Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>

On 04/16/2015 03:52 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar wrote:
> I'm hoping to reach a decision on how we handle docker rpms (vanilla +/- rh
> patches)
> There's the default docker that CentOS gets in extras from RHEL which comes
> with RH patches (of course). But this kinda comes quite a bit after upstream
> docker releases.
> Next up is 'docker' in virt SIG which usually tracks upstream releases. Would
> people prefer this build be vanilla upstream or with RH patches included.
> Then there is 'docker-master' in virt SIG which is a daily rebuild of docker
> upstream master branch + redhat patches.
> We could either:
> a) ship 'docker' in virt SIG with RH patches and also provide a
> 'docker-upstream' which is a vanilla upstream package
> b) ship 'docker' in virt SIG without any RH patches and provide a
> 'docker-redhat' with RH patches
> c) ...anything else??

Well, I think we should ship an AS-IS downstream from the RHEL platform
as one of the options.

As far as the "more progressive / newer" option, I would think one with
some RH patches (assuming the RH patches make it more stable than
vanilla upstream) would be desired.  I this being just the vanilla
upstream if we really wanted.  But I would think optimized with RH
patches would likely be better than pure vanilla.

in both cases though, we should "fix" these to actually work whether
they are broken upstream or not.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20150417/83fc86a9/attachment-0008.sig>