+1 Bipin Prasad <bipin_pra...@yahoo.com.invalid>于2023年12月12日 周二21:26写道：
> [+1] for publishing Storm docker images as part of Storm project > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Tuesday, December 12, 2023, 1:18 AM, Julien Nioche < > lists.digitalpeb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > [0] is of course a valid option, just like in any vote in any ASF-related > project > > Thanks > > > On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 09:01, Alexandre Vermeerbergen < > avermeerber...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I would have voted [0] if possible, but only [+1] or [-1] are proposed ;) > > > > Indeed, regarding Docker images, I tend to be reluctant to use > > community images appart from OS base ones and built mine based on my > > actual needs which are: > > 1. To use a specific JVM (I'm more found of OpenJ9 - aka IBM Semeru > > JRE than HotSpot - aka no matter which) > > 2. To package only what's needed in my Docker images. Given that the > > best practive in the word of containers in to have one process per > > container, I would build a image with only Storm process, another one > > with only Storm UI, etc (one tickly case is how to mix supervisor and > > logview ; and by the way worker processes should be spawned by Storm > > process acting as a k8s operator, to be really "cloud native" with k8s > > stack...) > > > > If the goal of the Docker image for which the vote is ran is to > > provide an all-in-one image embedding all Storm processes, then I'm > > neutral on it, it could help newbies in evaluating Storm... > > > > Given that I'm so undecided, I just confirm [0] > > (sorry for putting a mess in this vote) > > > > Alexandre > > > > Le mar. 12 déc. 2023 à 08:31, Richard Zowalla <r...@apache.org> a écrit > : > > > > > > +1 (think it would be good to "officially" be responsible and > > > distribute those on our own instead of relying on 3rd party repos) > > > > > > Am Montag, dem 11.12.2023 um 14:57 +0000 schrieb Julien Nioche: > > > > Dear Storm community, > > > > > > > > There was a recent discussion on the dev list [1] about a roadmap for > > > > the > > > > next release (major or minor). One of the items was to release Docker > > > > images for Apache Storm ourselves. There are Docker images but > > > > maintained > > > > by a third party [2]. By managing the images ourselves, we would have > > > > more > > > > control on when the images are available and also be able to fix > > > > issues > > > > quicker. > > > > > > > > The first step is to ask Infra to give our project seats on DockerHub > > > > [3]. > > > > > > > > Could we have a quick vote to make sure everyone is happy to go ahead > > > > with this? > > > > > > > > *[+1] publish Docker images ourselves and ask infra for seats to do > > > > so on > > > > Dockerhub* > > > > > > > > *or * > > > > > > > > *[-1] do not publish Docker images ourselves?* > > > > > > > > The vote is open for the next 72 hours and will finish on Thursday, > > > > December 14 at 3PM UTC. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > Julien Nioche > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/g78xg0k1m86m3o9jtj4g6p4cvvz3dhgr > > > > [2] https://github.com/31z4/storm-docker > > > > [3] https://infra.apache.org/docker-hub-policy.html > > > > > > > > -- > *Julien Nioche * > > > digitalpebble.com <http://www.digitalpebble.com/> > > > >
