incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Felix Meschberger <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] publishing docker image for podling
Date Thu, 05 Jan 2017 09:42:52 GMT

Deploying containers to Docker hub IMHO is the same as deploying Java artefacts to Maven or
Node.JS modules to NPM or whatever. It is a release of a convenience binary in addition to
the official source release.

As such:

+1 to supporting Docker, just like Maven Repositories or NPM repositories for convenience
binaries of releases

+1 to not requiring the „incubator“ suffix or prefix (similar to referred to Maven discussion)

+1 to requiring notes regarding incubation of the respective notes in any Docker Hub description
functionality (see for example


Am 05.01.2017 um 10:32 schrieb Greg Stein <<>>:

Taking off my Infrastructure hat from within that issue, and speaking to
this from a Foundation policy standpoint ... I think this is probably okay,
if the docker image is named (say) u/apache/incubator-singa. We allow
incubator projects in our github namespace as<>.

But then we also get into an area of "what happens around graduation?" ...
do we then offer both u/incubator-singa *and* u/singa ? ... If that's
acceptable, then this may be a simple decision. But for downstream
stability/continuity reasons would a podling want to *start* at
docker/u/singa ? ... and that is where I ask if the IPMC is willing to give
up the incubator- signal within our namespace on docker.

And yes, I recognize the similarity to the concurrent discussion about
Maven Central artifacts. There are costs/benefits around continuity and
impacts on downstream users.

Putting my Infra hat back on: the IPMC needs to specify a policy on
allowance and naming around<> hosting, that Infra
will use to
assist podlings.

Greg Stein
Infrastructure Administrator, ASF

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:11 AM, Thejas Nair <<>>

As per Greg Stein's comment in, we haven't had any
podling request for a docker image (aka a "convenience binary") to be
published within Apache's namespace in<> .

Starting this thread to see if we should have a vote on for this or we can
get incubator VP approval for this.


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message