mesos-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Lester <daveles...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Rocket
Date Wed, 03 Dec 2014 19:49:14 GMT
Thanks, I'll take the discussion to the GitHub issue.

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Tim Chen <tim@mesosphere.io> wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
> I actually can't remember is it on the github issue, email list or twitter
> feed, but definitely one of them.
>
> Tim St Clair just brought up Apache on #139, and I'm a +1 on that as well.
>
> Feel free to chime in on that Github issue you linked.
>
> Tim
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Dave Lester <davelester@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Tim C,
>>
>> Out of curiosity, which GitHub issue are you referring to when you say "Apache
>> is one of the options mentioned"?
>>
>> I don't see it it in the discussion thread for
>> https://github.com/coreos/rocket/issues/139, but I would love to find it
>> and +1 the idea. Moving to Apache would be great to see.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Timothy Chen <tim@mesosphere.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tim,
>>>
>>> Definitely I agree, i think what I am getting at is that it's clear from
>>> the conversation that a open governance is what they want from day one.
>>> Apache is one of the options mentioned one the Issue, and I believe
>>> something along that line is most probable.
>>>
>>> As long as that's true it won't be as difficult as other options to
>>> maintain  as an containerizer option for us.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2014, at 9:42 AM, Tim St Clair <tstclair@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> inline below
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> *From: *"Tim Chen" <tim@mesosphere.io>
>>> *To: *user@mesos.apache.org
>>> *Cc: *"dev" <dev@mesos.apache.org>
>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, December 3, 2014 11:20:47 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: Rocket
>>>
>>> Hi Tim,
>>>
>>> I see you've already commented on the rocket repo about this, and from
>>> their messaging it aims to be independent which should be the whole point
>>> of the open container spec.
>>>
>>> I'm all over this like white on rice.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think the best way is just to be involved in the spec early on and
>>> continue to do so while we move forward, and we have relationships with the
>>> rocket people which should help also being in the loop as well.
>>>
>>> Relationships alone won't cut it.
>>> Friends one day, enemies the next, isn't that the way it worked with
>>> Docker...?
>>>
>>> Governance, such as Apaches model, is of critical importance.
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Tim St Clair <tstclair@redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not to put too fine a point on it, but how are folks planning on
>>>> establishing governance around the App Container spec?
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/coreos/rocket/issues/193
>>>>
>>>> If the mesos community decides to leverage our own, how do we ensure
>>>> that we have say in the spec going forwards?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> > From: "Tobias Knaup" <tobi@knaup.me>
>>>> > To: user@mesos.apache.org
>>>> > Cc: "dev" <dev@mesos.apache.org>
>>>> > Sent: Monday, December 1, 2014 11:39:58 PM
>>>> > Subject: Re: Rocket
>>>> >
>>>> > An important point to clarify is that two things were announced: a
>>>> spec
>>>> > (App Container) and an implementation (Rocket).
>>>> > Here is the spec:
>>>> > https://github.com/coreos/rocket/blob/master/app-container/SPEC.md
>>>> > This separation of spec and implementation is important. It makes it
>>>> much
>>>> > easier to integrate in Mesos. systemd is also just the implementation
>>>> of
>>>> > the runtime part of the spec that CoreOS chose for Rocket. Mesos can
>>>> use
>>>> > something else or come with its own.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Dominic Hamon <
>>>> dhamon@twopensource.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Instead of considering the Rocket runtime as implemented, we should
>>>> > > instead consider how we can implement their specification. A
>>>> community is
>>>> > > always healthier when there are multiple implementations of a
>>>> > > specification, and through implementing it we may find ways to
>>>> improve it.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Also, this allows us to be a strong voice in the community and
>>>> provide
>>>> > > value through a C++ implementation.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I've created a JIRA ticket
>>>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2162 to track any
>>>> thoughts on
>>>> > > this.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Tim Chen <tim@mesosphere.io>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> Hi all,
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Per the announcement from CoreOS about Rocket (
>>>> > >> https://coreos.com/blog/rocket/) , it seems to be an exciting
>>>> > >> containerizer runtime that has composable isolation/components,
>>>> better
>>>> > >> security and image specification/distribution.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> All of these design goals also fits very well into Mesos, where
in
>>>> Mesos
>>>> > >> we also have a pluggable isolators model and have been
>>>> experiencing some
>>>> > >> pain points with our existing containerizers around image
>>>> distribution and
>>>> > >> security as well.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> I'd like to propose to integrate Rocket into Mesos with a new
>>>> Rocket
>>>> > >> containerizer, where I can see we can potentially integrate
our
>>>> existing
>>>> > >> isolators into Rocket runtime.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Like to learn what you all think,
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Thanks!
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > --
>>>> > > Dominic Hamon | @mrdo | Twitter
>>>> > > *There are no bad ideas; only good ideas that go horribly wrong.*
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Timothy St. Clair
>>>> Red Hat Inc.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> Timothy St. Clair
>>> Red Hat Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message