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

Mon Apr 20 18:06:15 UTC 2015
Lokesh Mandvekar <lsm5 at fedoraproject.org>

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:25:46PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar
> <lsm5 at fedoraproject.org> 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

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.

For anyone interested in RH patches, there's 'docker-master' in virt SIG
(docker master branch + RH patches) and 'docker' in CentOS-Extras of course.
Also, I could add anything else to make anyone else happy.

> What do the RH patches actually do?

Some docker behavior does get modified, like adding and blocking registries,
checking for confirmation before pushing to public registries. AFAIK, patches
were added only with permission from upstream docker and we're working
towards upstreaming those patches too.

> I think either one could make sense depending on how much value the
> patches provide / how much they cost to port to the latest release.

These patches are desirable to enterprise users, but I've been hearing a lot
directly/indirectly from CentOS users that they only want vanilla docker
behavior. Porting/rebasing is taken care of by RH folks on a daily basis.

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

Freenode, OFTC: lsm5
-------------- 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/20150420/88f835c5/attachment-0008.sig>