ActiveMQ (I still don’t like « classic » name ;)) not Artemis.
> Le 17 août 2021 à 19:00, Havret <hav...@apache.org> a écrit :
>
> Does it apply to Artemis as well, or only to Classic?
>
>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 10:29 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Havret-
>>
>> Yes, I am still planning a PR for the Docker image shortly. A number of
>> prerequisite fixes went in recently as part of the 5.16.3 release (maven
>> plugin versions, updated JDK support, etc).
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Matt Pavlovich
>>
>>>> On Aug 16, 2021, at 2:55 PM, Havret <hav...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Any update on this?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 4:39 PM Shank, Charles R <shan...@nationwide.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My co-worker and I were wondering if anyone has had a chance to review
>> our
>>>> sample docker image at
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16/jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile
>>>>
>>>> We saw where Matt Pavlovich was added to the Docker hub
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21430
>>>>
>>>> And I was wondering what the plan was to get our image added to Docker
>>>> hub? Or if the community have other plans?
>>>>
>>>> Was looking to see what the next steps will be to move forward on
>> having a
>>>> standard docker image for ActiveMQ
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your feedback on this issue
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Arthur Naseef <a...@amlinv.com>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 2:39 PM
>>>> To: dev@activemq.apache.org
>>>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Official Docker Image for ActiveMQ
>>>>
>>>> Nationwide Information Security Warning: This is an EXTERNAL email. Use
>>>> CAUTION before clicking on links, opening attachments, or responding.
>>>> (Sender: dev-return-72333-SHANKC1=nationwide....@activemq.apache.org)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I keep seeing mention of having multiple variations of docker images
>> using
>>>> different base images and some thoughts come to mind.
>>>>
>>>> Here are my thoughts:
>>>>
>>>> - Docker staged builds make it easy to copy specific contents from one
>>>> base image into a new one, leaving behind unwanted content (e.g. O/S
>> or
>>>> JDK
>>>> specifics)
>>>> - If the ActiveMQ-specific parts are placed in dedicated directories,
>>>> copying them out to new images would be straight forward
>>>> - Of couse, the number of combinations folks will want can grow to
>>>> unmaintainable levels quickly
>>>> - Having official image(s) that are functional, and provide a
>>>> "quick-start" to meet the following use-cases would be great value
>>>> across
>>>> the board:
>>>> - New user spinning up a broker to learn/experiment
>>>> - Build/Test pipeline ephemeral broker for application testing
>>>> purposes
>>>> - Docker containers have many means to gain access to additional
>> tooling
>>>> not built-into an image
>>>> - Because of this, having a minimal container is not
>> overly-limiting
>>>> - Of course, getting tools working with a process in a docker
>>>> container can be challenging (e.g. not everyone will be comfortable
>>>> to use
>>>> nsenter), so some basic tools may be good to have
>>>> - Providing a basic, well-structured image enables more complex
>>>> use-cases without having to clean-up / undo more advanced
>>>>
>>>> Hope this helps.
>>>>
>>>> Art
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 1:38 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> As I’m preparing ActiveMQ 5.17.0 with lot of changes, I plan to
>>>>> include docker image there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> JB
>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 17 mars 2021 à 09:26, Havret <h4v...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any update on this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 00:30 Clebert Suconic
>>>>>> <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I feel like we are stuck again on Infra.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the clone for artemis someone suggested asking for help in
>>>>>>> build.Apache.org which I then answered we just need help and
>>>>> authorization
>>>>>>> to upload stuff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone have any insight!?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 1:33 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not yet. INFRA has assigned that task, but not taken any action on
>>>>>>>> the request. I’ll nudge for an update.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 2021, at 12:21 PM, Clebert Suconic <
>>>>>>> clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you have a Jenkins job already aligned to build it ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:19 PM Matt Pavlovich
>>>>>>>>> <mattr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I’m prepping the PR for 5.17.0. Please provide feedback on the
>>>> JIRA.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 2021, at 11:16 AM, Havret <h4v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any update on this? I've just seen that Victor Romero archived
>>>>>>>>>>> his unofficial docker image. :(
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 4:57 PM Clebert Suconic <
>>>>>>>>>> clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm following up on that JIRA ticket.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:57 AM Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>>>>> <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Matt, I thought you already had some information about
>>>>>>> changes
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Infra. I had misunderstood you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:33 AM Matt Pavlovich <
>>>>>>> mattr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Clebert-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not have all the info yet, INFRA has assigned the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ticket but
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>> started working on it =)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Matt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 19, 2021, at 9:25 AM, Clebert Suconic <
>>>>>>>>>>>> clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I tried to follow the JIRA on Infra and I did not see much
>>>>>>>>>>>> information about it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What's the procedure to upload images?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only thing I saw was this JIRA: But it seemed you would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be uploading images manually?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21430
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't there an official way to provide the images?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In artemis we have a docker module where you would build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> binaries
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and create the image. We would just need to add that to a
>>>>> Jenkins
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build and produce an image whenever a tag is created.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I suppose ActiveMQ branch would do the same...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How this is supposed to work?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thank you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:13 PM Matt Pavlovich <
>>>>>>> mattr...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The initial features list and notes in the JIRA reflect
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> approach. I’ll start on the module and push a PR this weekend.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
>>>>>>>> j...@nanthrax.net
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree, I think it’s the most convenient approach.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For instance, at Karaf, I maintain a Dockerfile as part
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> codebase:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/karaf/tree/master/assemblies/docker
>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/karaf/tree/master/assemblies/docker>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As part of a Karaf release, I’m pushing Karaf docker image.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, anyone can start from the Karaf Dockerfile to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>>> their own one (we also provide a goal on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> karaf-maven-plugin to
>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>> so).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think ActiveMQ (at least classic) should just provide a
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dockerfile (or a set) and push "official" docker images. But
>>>>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>> letting
>>>>>>>>>>>> people to create their own.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 17 févr. 2021 à 19:51, Hossack, Etienne
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ehoss...@amazon.com.INVALID> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Following this discussion with interest, since I greatly
>>>>> enjoy
>>>>>>>>>>>> the portability and consistency that Docker provides.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have some questions about the Dockerfile linked above
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> might be best served in a code review, but a more holistic
>>>>>>>>>>>> question
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>> wanted to ask:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does ActiveMQ need to publish the Dockerfile?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In my opinion, simply defining the image then
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documenting its
>>>>>>>>>>>> location (README, website) and how to use it would add value
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>> many
>>>>>>>>>>>> consumers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That way:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * The Dockerfile code can live within the ActiveMQ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repository
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> be close to the code
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Anyone who wishes to consume the dockerfile can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Apache 2.0
>>>>>>>>>>>> license) through their own build process
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * The ActiveMQ community does not need to maintain any
>>>>>>>> additional
>>>>>>>>>>>> infrastructure, release process, repositories, dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * The Dockerfile can and should be independent of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>>>>>>> binaries <
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.docker.com/develop/develop-images/dockerfile_best-practic
>>>>> es/#env
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> whenever possible, but even if not, this way each active
>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>> the source of truth for a functioning Dockerfile (can build
>>>>>>>>>>>> and run
>>>>>>>>>> tests
>>>>>>>>>>>> on the version), and no incremental versions would have to be
>>>>>>>> published.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we could gain lots of value for little
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> investment
>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> way. What do you think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Étienne
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P.S. should I add the questions on the JIRA ticket as
>> well?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Étienne Hossack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Software Development Engineer, Amazon MQ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> email: ehoss...@amazon.com <mailto:ehoss...@amazon.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> phone: +1-778-945-8287
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2021, at 9:38 AM, Clebert Suconic <
>>>>>>>>>>>> clebert.suco...@gmail.com <mailto:clebert.suco...@gmail.com>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the
>>>>>>>> organization.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> sender
>>>>>>>>>>>> and know the content is safe.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be nice to do the same with Artemis... we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>> scripts to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build the images as part of the build.. we just don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> builds yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:36 AM Jenkins, Rodney J
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Rod) < jenki...@nationwide.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:jenki...@nationwide.com>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quick introduction: My name is Rod. I work with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chuck. I
>>>>>>> am
>>>>>>>>>>>> stepping in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while he is out. I am the coworker who does the TomEE
>>>>>>> images.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a question on the tarballs on
>>>>>>>> https://archive.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://archive.apache.org/> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repo1.maven.org <https://repo1.maven.org/>. I
>>>>>>>> noticed
>>>>>>>>>>>> that the images are not the same SHA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not the same size. Is there a reason for that?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW, the Dockerfile is mostly complete,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16
>>>>> /jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile
>>>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq/blob/master/classic/5.16
>>>>> /jre11/openjdk-buster/Dockerfile
>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the only thing left was getting the maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> download
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> work as the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback to the other repos. I can still make that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work,
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>> thought it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was strange to see a difference in the sizes of the
>>>> files.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is what we are proposing. I am going to start on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> other options
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> later today. We would be happy for any feedback.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rod.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Shank, Charles R" <shan...@nationwide.com
>>>>> <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>>> shan...@nationwide.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Date: *Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 8:49 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To: *Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>>> j...@nanthrax.net>>, Matt Pavlovich <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mattr...@gmail.com <mailto:mattr...@gmail.com>>, "
>>>>>>>>>>>> dev@activemq.apache.org <mailto:dev@activemq.apache.org>" <
>>>>>>>>>>>> dev@activemq.apache.org <mailto:dev@activemq.apache.org>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Cc: *"Jenkins, Rodney J (Rod)"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jenki...@nationwide.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:jenki...@nationwide.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Official Docker Image for ActiveMQ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree we should make this its own issue and open up
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ActiveMQ community
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, we are working on the following repository
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> provide generic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> images available to the ActiveMQ community. You can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> follow
>>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>>>>>>> progress
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here: *https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq <
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/shankc1crs/docker-activemq>>*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because the needs of the community are varied, we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recommend
>>>>>>>>>>>> making
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple versions of ActiveMQ classic and Artemis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>> repos
>>>>>>>>>>>> also will be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> created to include OpenJDK and AdoptopenJDK. We also
>>>>>>>> recommend
>>>>>>>>>>>> leaving
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> room for other operating systems other than Debian and
>>>>>>>> multiple
>>>>>>>>>>>> versions of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK within both OpenJDK and AdoptopenJDK.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Given the number of options, we are not sure how we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>> go
>>>>>>>>>>>> about using a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> module to maintain the dockerfiles, but would be open
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Once we get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our dockerimages complete, we can discuss how they are
>>>>>>>>>>>> maintained going
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forward. We will also investigate with the folks at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/docker-library <
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/docker-library> to see what is required to
>>>>>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> images listed as the official images. I have a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coworker
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the TomEE official images and has some
>>>>>>>> contacts
>>>>>>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We would like to get the communities thoughts and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input on
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> course of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> action.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chuck Shank
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: cid:image001.gif@01D70449.0A4B26E0
>>>>>>>>>>>> <cid:image001.gif@01D70449.0A4B26E0>]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: cid:image002.gif@01D70449.0A4B26E0
>>>>>>>>>>>> <cid:image002.gif@01D70449.0A4B26E0>]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
