----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Munch" <dani.mu...@gmail.com> > > Now for me it feels a little as if couchdb could go into the same > direction. While couchdb-ci has already all the necessary build and > test steps, those are sort of duplicated in couchdb-docker, only that > in the latter it's a little harder to create all sorts of > permutations > of os/erlang version. For me, ideally, couchdb-ci would be able to > create the end-user image just as another form of packaging. This > would also mean that couchdb-docker could disappear at some point. > With the build infrastructure already contained in couchdb-ci, the > Dockerfiles representing the actual "runtime images" will become much > simpler and may find their place in couchb-ci as well.
Thanks Daniel, this is good food for thought. You should note that we actually have a third repo, couchdb-pkg, that is used for all the packaging content, just to make things confusing ;) Right now it includes the Debian/Ubuntu (.deb) control files and the snap content, but will soon include the CentOS packaging stuff as well. Indeed, if you look at couchdb-docker right now, you'll see that the image installs all of the build chain tooling, then builds CouchDB, then *uninstalls* the tools to shrink the resulting image. We may very well be able to chain that part onto the couchdb-ci images rather than duplicating the work. As for the other points you raise, I need to think about it more. -Joan
