Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 16/05/17 14:08 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> 1/ Have third-parties publish images >> It is the current situation. The issue is that the Kolla team (and >> likely others) would rather automate the process and use OpenStack >> infrastructure for it. >> >> 2/ Have third-parties publish images, but through OpenStack infra >> This would allow to automate the process, but it would be a bit weird to >> use common infra resources to publish in a private repo. >> >> 3/ Publish transient (per-commit or daily) images >> A "daily build" (especially if you replace it every day) would set >> relatively-limited expectations in terms of maintenance. It would end up >> picking up security updates in upstream layers, even if not immediately. >> >> 4/ Publish images and own them >> Staff release / VMT / stable team in a way that lets us properly own >> those images and publish them officially. >> >> Personally I think (4) is not realistic. I think we could make (3) work, >> and I prefer it to (2). If all else fails, we should keep (1). > > Agreed #4 is a bit unrealistic. > > Not sure I understand the difference between #2 and #3. Is it just the > cadence?
In #3 the infrastructure ends up publishing to an official "openstack-daily" repository. In #2 the infrastructure job ends up publishing to some "flavios-garage" repository. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
