On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Jason Brooks <jbrooks at redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Colin Walters <walters at verbum.org> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016, at 12:55 PM, Jason Brooks wrote: >> >>> I want to discuss diverging from RHEL AH by not including the >>> kubernetes-node pkg in our downstream image. This would allow users to >>> install a newer version of the kubernetes-node, such as this 1.4.5 >>> version from my copr[3] that I hope to see move into the virt-sig >>> soon. >> >> Right. The disadvantage to this is...that people who have masters set >> up for 1.3 will need to use layering or a container for node. > > If anyone wants a 1.3 master after downstream is released, they'll > need to use containers to run it, because we're shipping kube 1.2 > right now, and we're set not to include the 1.3 master components in > the next downstream. If might make sense instead to put etcd flannel and kube-master back in, so as not to disrupt people who are using them. We do have the option of the alpha branch for those who want a stripped down host. > > If we roll the 1.3 kubelet into the image, people could still run a > newer kubelet, but they'd have to use a container or separate binary > to do it. > > Maybe it's not worth diverging at this point, but since the aims of > RHEL AH and of CentOS AH are somewhat different, esp wrt kubernetes, > which is now supported only in single node mode for RHEL AH, it's not > crazy for the package sets we deploy to be different. The actual rpms > wouldn't be diverging, just the selection of them. > >> >> I'm uncertain, because it seems like a major point of CentOS Core >> builds is fidelity, even bug-for-bug, and this is a major difference. >> >> To be clear, you're just talking about -node, not etcd/flannel for example? > > Right. > >> _______________________________________________ >> CentOS-devel mailing list >> CentOS-devel at centos.org >> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel