airflow-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Driesprong, Fokko" <fo...@driesprong.frl>
Subject Re: Tagging of the airflow images
Date Tue, 11 Jun 2019 19:36:57 GMT
I would prefer to use one repository as well. Building from multiple
repositories, in my opinion, this can become very complex, very easily.

>From what I understand, we should avoid using the latest tag in Docker. The
meaning of the *latest* tag is the latest untagged container. I'm more on
the explicit side of things here. My preference would be to change this
name to *stable* instead. Or use *release*, but that's the Java guy inside
of me.

Where are we going to source the version from? My preference would be to
have this in a single place, but I'm not sure if this is possible. For
example, let the setup.py determine the version, and use this for tagging
the container.

WDYT Jarek?

Cheers, Fokko

Op di 11 jun. 2019 om 20:38 schreef Kamil BreguĊ‚a <kamil.bregula@polidea.com
>:

> 1) I would prefer to use one repository.
> +1
>
> 2) The presented schema looks logical to me. I had doubts whether
> Python 3.5 was a good choice for "latest" version, but I checked that
> travis uses only this version.
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:04 PM Jarek Potiuk <Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > We are close to finish AIP-10 (Airlfow image for CI) and seems that we
> will
> > start working soon on an official image AIP, but in the meantime we have
> > 1.10.4 release coming and we would like to agree tagging scheme used for
> > the current CI images. We discussed it a bit on Slack, but it's time to
> > bring it here. I created a JIRA issue for it:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-4764  and my proposals
> after
> > the initial discussion are those:
> >
> > First of all we have different images that we can talk about :
> >
> >    1. "base" one - with bare development-ready airflow with minimum set
> of
> >    dependencies
> >    2. "CI" with all the tools packages that are needed for CI tests
> >    3. Soon we will likely have an "official" one which might be used in
> >    similar fashion as the "puckel" one.
> >
> > There are two decisions to make:
> >
> > 1) How to keep those images - in one repository or whether we should have
> > separate repos.
> >
> > It is easier for now to keep all of them within apache/airflow
> > <https://cloud.docker.com/u/apache/repository/docker/apache/airflow>
> repository
> > it seems and use a labelling scheme to separate those (there is nothing
> > wrong with that but it might seem a bit hacky). It's a bit easier to
> > maintain with access and CI.
> >
> > We could also think about separate apache/airflow-ci, apache/airflow-dev,
> > apache/airflow-prod or smth similar - that would require some
> > infrastructure tickets and is not very common.
> >
> > 2) What labelling scheme to use(apache/airflow:label). My proposal is
> > similar to this (if we keep everything in the airflow repository)
> >
> >    - *latest* = latest released version (python 3.5)  = *
> v1.10.3-python3.5*
> >    - *master* = latest master version (python 3.5)  =
> *v2.0.0dev0-python3.5*
> >    - *v1.10.3-python3.5,v1.10.3-python3.6*  - released 1.10.3 with python
> >    3.5/3.6
> >    - *latest-ci *= latest released version of CI variant (python 3.5)
> >    *v1.10.3-ci-python3.5*
> >    - *master-ci* = latest master version of CI variant (python 3.5)
> >    *v2.0.0dev0-ci-python3.5*
> >    - *v1.10.3-ci-python3.5, v1.10.3-ci-python3.6* - released 1.10.3 with
> >    python 3.5/3.6
> >
> >
> > My preference is to keep all the images in one repo and use labelling
> > scheme as above,
> > but I am open to discuss this.
> >
> > J,
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Jarek Potiuk
> > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
> >
> > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
>

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