On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:02 PM, kmbulebu <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe the real horse race is between the > underlying docker libraries. In the end, we'll likely have a clear winner, > and can standardize a group of plugins around that. Perhaps docker-commons > becomes that focal point, and we have smaller plugins that deliver slaves, > build steps, workflow DSL, etc.
Seems reasonable to me to have smaller plugins with focused features, and a little competition. I would not object to hosting as is, provided that plugin wikis clearly link to alternatives. IIUC the main differences between your plugin and the `Cloud` portion of the `docker` plugin are · Different client libraries. No clear winner yet. · Slave launcher: yours uses JNLP; `docker` plugin currently ships SSH, has JNLP support in code but disabled. If you can later reach consensus with the `docker` plugin devs on the approach to take for a general-purpose Docker cloud provider, it should be possible to unify code into a new plugin release. Automatic migration of user settings will be a bit trickier but is possible. By the way your comparison chart neglected to mention https://github.com/ndeloof/docker-slaves-plugin which is a novel approach that I think is very promising. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CANfRfr1hTuSsTQ8RWL%3DdqSZLDH_JRZ6jPpMBQ51o2Hrv%2BKCNUA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
