zipkin-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Zoltán Nagy <>
Subject Re: docker repos and the ASF
Date Mon, 21 Jan 2019 11:55:27 GMT
AFAIK the only official ASF releases are source releases. Everything else
is a convenience for users. So that means any Docker repo is also
"unofficial" in that they're not ASF releases.

My 2 cents: if we're still talking DockerHub repos, then it shouldn't
really matter, operationally, which org they are under. Pro for being under
Apache: branding. Con: harder to get a list of all OpenZipkin-related
Docker repos. The org currently has 38 repositories (see OpenZipkin has 18 ( We'd be one third of the repos! I
think I'm very mildly against moving.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 11:41 AM Andriy Redko <> wrote:

> Hi Adrian,
> This is a very good question. I haven't run into this yet, but I dug into
> the mailing lists/tickets,
> found a good use case from Apache Beam  [1]. The Apache Booking project
> also publishes to official
> Docker Hub 'apache' repo, here is the ticket to look at [2]. I think it
> should be possible to transfer
> and publish Docker repo, though at least for incubation period, they will
> be unofficial, you are right.
> [1]
> [2]
> Best Regards,
>     Andriy Redko
> AC> Hi, all.
> AC> We had some discussions about whether or not the docker repos should
> AC> be moved to apache at all. Now would be a good time to revisit this,
> AC> before they are transferred.
> AC> Does anyone know pros and cons of apache docker repos? I thought I had
> AC> read that they aren't official in any case.
> AC> Best,
> AC> -Adrian
> AC> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> AC> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> AC> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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