The docker builds are provided as a convenience, just as the binaries are. The official release processes are required by ASF as the custodian entity for the project. It would be more appropriate to have a better release process so we can do this at least quarterly.
Please see my other thread about the need for build automation. As for the tags on Docker, I do think Adam S could have provided more discussion, but he dug into it and fixed something - that's the intent and I trust that everyone understands the good intentions. Moreover, the transparency that is now enabled is better than before.. and having a cluttered set of tagging that has nothing to do with an actual release is not useful, and from what I am reading may give a false sense that each tagged build is somehow a "release". They're not. We cannot pretend that they are. The project can discuss how to use Docker, or not. Again, the docker images are merely a convenience we do - not a release. Let's aim to improve both. On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 6:47 AM Arnold Galovics < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Adam, > > Let's put back the tags as soon as possible. If somebody was relying on > them, now their deployment might be broken (which again, disapproves the > use of the community Fineract but further enhancing the importance of > rather forking it). > > > *Here’s my perspective: even if we go back to producing Docker tags for > each commit, any bugfix is always based on the latest develop branch > anyway. In practice, there’s little difference between pulling the latest > tag and pulling a commit-specific tag like > a2c66e6c319e8c7b0e335d6d35d47c893abc353c (which, for example, contains the > recent bugfix for FINERACT-2353). Both represent the state of develop at > that time.* > > There's one fundamental difference though. Reproducibility. If a > deployment is based on "latest" - let's assume a Kubernetes deployment/ECS > deployment/even a simple docker compose deployment, a simple restart could > produce a very different version then it was before. It's unsustainable. > > > *Also, it’s worth emphasizing that these builds are not official > Fineract releases. They’re essentially snapshots of ongoing development, > with the 1.x tags reserved for actual releases.* > > Agreed, they are snapshots. But the reason they are so important is > because we - as a PMC - haven't defined any predictable, quick ways to > reliably produce Fineract releases, hence people need to take this into > their own hands and rely on "snapshots". > > > To be honest, I'm really surprised this has been done without any > preliminary discussion and analysis and was kind of a reckless move in my > mind. Let's try not doing this in the future. Such a backward incompatible > change - which could affect hundreds of deployments - must be discussed > beforehand. Again, Adam, this is nothing against you, it's just one of the > indicators that Fineract doesn't have such mature processes yet - which in > turn and I keep repeating myself here, forces people to rather fork > Fineract and do their thing in the fork. > > Best, > Arnold > > > Arnold Gálovics > > *CEO, Co-Founder* > > *+36 30 904 1885* > > https://docktape.com > > Docktape Technologies > > > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 3:37 PM Ádám Sághy <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Arnold, >> >> Thanks for raising your concerns! >> >> Yes, the tags were removed. I was just about to share more context, as >> Docker Scout has been enabled on the project, and with hundreds of tags the >> visibility became really poor. >> >> Since we’re already on the topic (and I admit, a bit later than I should >> have brought it up—my bad!), it’s worth discussing whether we really want >> to create and maintain a tag for *every* commit on the develop branch. >> >> Here’s my perspective: even if we go back to producing Docker tags for >> each commit, any bugfix is always based on the latest develop branch >> anyway. In practice, there’s little difference between pulling the latest tag >> and pulling a commit-specific tag like >> a2c66e6c319e8c7b0e335d6d35d47c893abc353c (which, for example, contains >> the recent bugfix for FINERACT-2353). Both represent the state of develop at >> that time. >> >> Also, it’s worth emphasizing that these builds are not official Fineract >> releases. They’re essentially *snapshots* of ongoing development, with >> the 1.x tags reserved for actual releases. >> >> That’s the reasoning behind the cleanup, and I hope it clarifies my >> thinking here. Of course, I’m open to further discussion if the community >> feels strongly about commit-based tags. >> >> Best, >> Adam >> >> On 2025. Sep 17., at 15:14, Arnold Galovics <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Adam, >> >> Does this mean the "legacy" tags were deleted from DockerHub too? >> >> Why was removing the commithash-based tags deprecated and removed? I >> don't think we had a discussion around this. >> >> Originally I was the one introducing the commit-hash based tags for both >> Fineract and for the Mifos UI because what we all can agree on is that we >> have infrequent releases. >> >> As long as we don't have a predefined release train for the next 6 >> months, preferably with monthly releases, I just don't see how anybody can >> effectively rely on Fineract releases. >> >> Imagine you have a client who uses Fineract. There's a bug. You fix it, >> open a PR, merge it to the develop branch and that's all. Bug is fixed, >> nothing is released, the bugfix cannot be applied to your client since you >> don't have an official release of Fineract which includes the fix. Waiting >> for 6 months for a new release? Unrealistic. >> >> In my opinion this rather incentivizes forking Fineract completely and >> never looking back. As long as we don't make it easy for clients to grab >> the latest things easily (and "latest" is not an option, because it always >> moves and companies want predictable things), we're pushing people off from >> building a strong (client) community. >> >> Let me know if I misunderstood something. >> >> Best, >> Arnold >> >> Arnold Gálovics >> *CEO, Co-Founder* >> *+36 30 904 1885* >> https://docktape.com >> Docktape Technologies >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 2:54 PM Ádám Sághy <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Dear fellow Fineracters, >>> >>> We’ve recently reworked how Docker images for Fineract are published >>> (thank you "Akshat-Soni02 >>> <https://github.com/Akshat-Soni02/Akshat-Soni02>”, “javamak”) : >>> https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/4969 >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/fineract/pull/5021 >>> >>> *Summary of changes:* >>> >>> >>> - >>> >>> The latest tag now always points to the most recent build of the >>> develop branch (automatically updated with each push). >>> - >>> >>> Versioned tags like 1.12.1, 1.12.0, etc. correspond to official >>> releases. >>> - >>> >>> Legacy tags (e.g., commit hashes and other intermediate builds) have >>> been cleaned up. >>> >>> This maintenance was long overdue, and we hope the new structure makes >>> it easier and clearer to use our Docker images. >>> >>> Please let me know if you are missing any “earlier” releases, and I will >>> build and upload manually the missing versions. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Adam >>> >> >>
