+1 “I think it would be better to organize around 1 git repo per language.”

-r

> On Dec 12, 2018, at 9:21 AM, David P Grove <gro...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> For the runtimes specifically, if it is technically feasible I think it would 
> be better to organize around 1 git repo per language. 
> 
> That repo could contain multiple runtime variants with different degrees of 
> maturity. Several of the runtime repos already contain multiple variants 
> (nodejs, php, python). Can that pattern work for go too?
> 
> --dave
> 
> Carlos Santana ---12/12/2018 07:26:56 AM---My 2 cents about the "contrib" 
> repo for best effort support and experimental code we already have a
> 
> From: Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com>
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Date: 12/12/2018 07:26 AM
> Subject: Re: I created a variant of the go runtime that is faster at init time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 2 cents about the "contrib" repo for best effort support and
> experimental code we already have a repo
> 
> It used be named incubator-openwhisk-experimental, but then we rename it to
> incubator-openwhisk-devtools [1]
> 
> If any one has some cool experiments we have created a new folder in the
> repo and add some trivial travis test
> 
> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk-devtools
> -cs
> 
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 2:13 AM Michele Sciabarra <mich...@sciabarra.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Hmm, I understand the concern but I wonder HOW the "convenience" binaries
> > should be handled in practice.
> >
> > In OpenWhisk what it matters is the runtime you specify with --docker, so
> > that "convenience" is not really just a convenience, it is a core
> > requirement.
> >
> > We could setup an openwhisk contrib repository, but I cannot image a
> > single Travis build to be able to rebuild many images (at the moment I have
> > at least 4) and push  all of them to docker hub...
> >
> >
> > --
> >   Michele Sciabarra
> >   mich...@sciabarra.com
> >
> > ----- Original message -----
> > From: Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@adobe.com.INVALID>
> > To: "dev@openwhisk.apache.org" <dev@openwhisk.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: I created a variant of the go runtime that is faster at init
> > time
> > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:00:07 +0000
> >
> > Hi Michele
> >
> > This is shaky ground and we don’t want to be the next npm horror story.
> >
> > Technically speaking, at Apache we primarily release source packages, all
> > binary is pure convenience. Granted the convience today is what most people
> > use.
> >
> > So what we should primarily do, as Bertrand hinted, is have a contrib
> > repository. We can still have a contrib docker account into which the
> > OpenWhisk PMC can regularly „dump“ binary builds for convience. But it must
> > be clearly stated that those are not releases, have no release quality and
> > all the usual disclaimers.
> >
> > Regards
> > Felix
> >
> > > Am 12.12.2018 um 10:55 schrieb Michele Sciabarra <mich...@sciabarra.com
> > >:
> > >
> > > Actually more than an account on GitHub it is important to have a docker
> > hub account named "openwhisk-contrib" so you can deploy an action with
> > something like:
> > >
> > > wsk create myaction --docker openwhisk-contrib/actionloop-gccgo-v1.10
> > >
> > > To publish images, you can do sothing as simple as ask, maybe opening a
> > ticket, to push an image msciab/actionloop-gccgo-v1.10
> > > to  openwhisk-contrib/actionloop-gccgo-v1.10.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >  Michele Sciabarra
> > >  mich...@sciabarra.com
> > >
> > > ----- Original message -----
> > > From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org>
> > > To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: I created a variant of the go runtime that is faster at
> > init time
> > > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:45:43 +0100
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:42 AM Michele Sciabarra
> > > <mich...@sciabarra.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Indeed I was thinking to create a docker account  "openwhisk-contrib"
> > to place those, let's say, unofficial images.
> > >> I am not sure who should own this account...
> > >
> > > Accounts with "openwhisk" in their name should be owned by the
> > > OpenWhisk (P)PMC as the name is a trademark of the Apache Software
> > > Foundation - technically being donated as we speak IIUC but that
> > > doesn't make a real difference.
> > >
> > > However what we are discussing here IMO is code repositories as code
> > > is what the ASF produces. I guess Felix's suggestion is to create one
> > > or a few openwhisk-contrib-* Git repositories under
> > > https://github.com/apache/ for such "contrib" modules.
> > >
> > > -Bertrand
> >
> >
> 
> -- 
> Carlos Santana
> <csantan...@gmail.com>
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to