Hi Peter, I remember seeing this but the criteria about working only on Mac and Windows makes it a challenge, in my opinion.
I also need to apologize as I certainly confused the Dockerfiles between the Maven plugin and the Docker Hub. My prior email should have been directed toward the Maven scenario as that is using the ADD. Docker Hub will just require an updating of the curl command to the .zip extension and we should be set. Regardless, Andy, when you make the issue for this change feel free to create a subtask of that to update the Dockerfiles. Looks like Peter is up to the task but I am also happy to help make the adjustments and verify. The first linked item you provided is the multistage approach mentioned. Multistage builds allow you to effectively create throw away images only selecting specific artifacts from them to use in a new image. Thanks! --aldrin On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:11 AM Peter Wilcsinszky < peterwilcsins...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I wrote about a different solution for which I implemented a PoC for in > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6122674030b8f99a63d586dcdbdaf6b31841572aed63fcc9dcfb5eea@%3Cdev.nifi.apache.org%3E > but multistage build could be a better option and I'm happy to create an > issue and fix it for the next release. > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 3:42 AM Andy LoPresto <alopre...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Thanks Aldrin. I am not knowledgeable on Docker — do either of these > > options help us? We could also use a RUN to curl the Zip resource and > COPY > > the unzipped directory? > > > > [1] https://github.com/moby/moby/issues/15036#issuecomment-322177465 > > [2] https://github.com/jlhawn/dockramp > > > > > > Andy LoPresto > > alopre...@apache.org > > *alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <alopresto.apa...@gmail.com>* > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > > On Jun 28, 2018, at 6:22 PM, Aldrin Piri <aldrinp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Be mindful to also update the Dockerfile used for Docker Hub as this will > > require some adjustments. Unfortunately, the ADD instruction does not > > support zip files. This isn't a major inconvenience but will require a > > multi-stage build to help keep our image size svelte. I believe we > should > > be safe as we have been publishing both tarballs and zips for prior > > releases, so the Dockerfile should still work in that scenario. > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 4:06 PM Andy LoPresto <alopre...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > Thanks for everyone’s input. It seems to be a clear consensus to > eliminate > > .tar.gz and only provide .zip moving forward. I’d like to keep this > > discussion thread going for another day or two to field any objections. > > After that time (Friday-ish), I’ll create a Jira to do this unless things > > change. > > > > I will probably keep the possibility to generate the .tar.gz through an > > inactive profile to allow people who need that offering to use it. There > > will be a subtask Jira to update the release guide moving forward as > well. > > > > > > Andy LoPresto > > alopre...@apache.org > > *alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <alopresto.apa...@gmail.com>* > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > > On Jun 26, 2018, at 7:52 PM, James Wing <jvw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > It's a great idea, Andy, I strongly support just one format. I think Zip > > is a good choice. > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > I end up using zip all the time. zip +1 > > > > > > On June 26, 2018 at 13:30:33, Tony Kurc (tk...@apache.org) wrote: > > > > My preference is zip. > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 9:21 AM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 6/25/18 11:34 PM, Andy LoPresto wrote: > > > > Hi folks, > > > > I do not want to start a long-running argument or entrenched battle. > > However, having just performed the RM duties for the latest release, I > > believe I have identified a resource inefficiency in the fact that we > > generate, upload, host, and distribute two compressed archives of the > > binary which are functionally equivalent. For 1.7.0, both the .tar.gz > > and .zip files are 1.2 GB (1_224_352_000 bytes for tar.gz vs. > > 1_224_392_000 bytes for zip). The time to build and sign these is > > substantial, but the true cost comes in uploading and hosting them. > > While the fabled extension registry will save all of us from this > > burden, it isn’t arriving tomorrow, and I think we could drastically > > improve this before the next release. > > > > I have no personal preference between the two formats. In earlier days, > > there were platform inconsistencies and the tools weren’t available on > > all systems, but now they are pretty standard for all users. This [1] > > > > is > > > > an interesting article I found which had some good info on the origins, > > and here are some additional resources for anyone interested [2][3]. I > > don’t care which we pick, but I propose removing one of the options for > > the build going forward (toolkit as well). > > > > That said, if someone has a good reason that both are necessary, I > > > > would > > > > love to hear it. I didn’t find anything on the Apache Release Policy > > which stated we must offer both, but maybe I missed it. Thanks. > > > > > > I'm not aware of any ASF policy. I think it mostly stems from default > > convention you get out of the maven-assembly-plugin. > > > > [1] https://itsfoss.com/tar-vs-zip-vs-gz/ > > [2] https://superuser.com/a/1257441/40003 > > [3] https://superuser.com/a/173995/40003 > > [4] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#artifacts > > > > > > Andy LoPresto > > alopre...@apache.org <mailto:alopre...@apache.org <alopre...@apache.org > >> > > /alopresto.apa...@gmail.com <mailto:alopresto.apa...@gmail.com > > <alopresto.apa...@gmail.com>>/ > > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
