On 06/10/15 09:13, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote: > On 10/01/2015 09:53 PM, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote: >> On 10/01/2015 05:53 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: >>> On 24/09/15 18:17, Jason Brooks wrote: >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Joe Brockmeier" <jzb at redhat.com> >>>>> To: "The CentOS developers mailing list." <centos-devel at centos.org> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 5:25:51 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] Atomic-developer-bundle for inclusion >>>>> in Atomic SIG >>>>> >>>>> On 09/23/2015 08:17 AM, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote: >>>>>> On 09/08/2015 07:08 PM, Lalatendu Mohanty wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As part of Project Atomic [1], we are working on a toolchain (as of >>>>>>> now it is a Vagrant box) i.e. atomic-developer-bundle [2], for >>>>>>> helping >>>>>>> application developers package their microservice architecture >>>>>>> applications for delivery via Linux containers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ADB (atomic developer bundle) is supported on GNU/Linux >>>>>>> distributions, >>>>>>> OS X and Windows. It has (or is going to have) all the goodies that >>>>>>> are part of Project Atomic to better enable Linux containers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Currently, the Vagrant box is based on CentOS. Therefore I think it >>>>>>> makes more sense to include it in the CentOS Atomic SIG or any other >>>>>>> appropriate SIG. I believe this will open channels with the >>>>>>> community >>>>>>> and lead to greater participation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let me know your thoughts on including the ADB as part of a SIG. For >>>>>>> details please go through the README in ADB github repo [2] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/projectatomic >>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/projectatomic/adb-atomic-developer-bundle >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I am still looking for suggestion /comments for this. >>>> I'm +1 as well >>> I'm largely +/- 0 on this, with the slight hesitation that this Atomic >>> is about an atomicapp, and has no real relation to an ostree driven >>> atomic host, which is what we've worked on in the Atomic SIG so far. >>> >>> the SIG proposal also mostly talks about the platform side of things, >>> which AtomicApp isnt a part of. >>> >>> could the atomicapp effort better fit in elsewhere ? >>> >>> >> I cant think of any other place for Atomic App other than Atomic SIG >> at this point (unless we are going to have a container SIG). Also I >> think Atomic APP does not fit in Virt SIG as it just consumes virt SIG . >> >> Initially Project Atomic was about only atomic host (similar to Atomic >> SIG) but now it is a umbrella project for many more things. So I think >> it is better to include the ADB stuff + Atomic APP in Atomic SIG as >> these are part of Project Atomic umbrella. >> >> Thanks, >> Lala > > I should have mentioned about the requirements I am looking from the SIG > in the original mail. Here it is. > > 1. A dist git for building the Vagrant box. So that we do real build and > scratch builds. Scratch builds are temporary. > a. At this point of time dist gits will not have any packages > apart from core CentOS. But we cant rule out that we wont add packages > in future. > b. We might build multiple Vagrant boxes. Can you expand a bit on what you mean by 'dist-git' ? > > 2. A http location where the ADB Vagrant box maintainers would get write > access. So that we can do a regular releases. We will also reference > this location from https://atlas.hashicorp.com/atomicapp > a. We will have a stable box and a testing box. So that community > can provide feedback on the cutting edge stuff. within the scope of the CentOS Project, regardless of what SIG, there is no direct access to any release location. The way to get content into release locations is to work back through a release request process. Its not ideal at the moment, but we can try and get better at it. regards, > > > Navid and Bex are interested building the box and co-maintain the > Vagrant box for CentOS community and the above requirement will help me > to add them as co-maintainers. > > KB mentioned (in atomic SIG meeting) that the ADB box can be part of > Cloud Instance SIG [1] . It think the advantage will be that with Cloud > Instance SIG we can push the Vagrant box to different public cloud > providers. KB let me know if I am wrong. > > However I think from the community/users point of view it should be part > of Atomic SIG as the target users are same as the Atomic SIG. Which will > help the ADB project to grow. > > As of now I have access to scratch build the Vagrant box (thanks to > Atomic SIG). However I do not have access to a http location where I can > put the box. Also we don't not have dist git for the ADB Vagrant box. > > > Temporarily KB putting them on > http://cloud.centos.org/centos/7/vagrant/x86_64/images/ (thanks to KB) > . However I don't have write access so I think this location will not > work out long term as the Vagrant box maintainers will not get write > access to cloud.centos.org. > > [1] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/CloudInstance > > Thanks, > Lala > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc