Re: Official Docker Groovy images
Sorry, I should have clarified the term. By "official", I mean the way Docker team uses the term (which you can read more about here <https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/official_repos/>). Short version is that the upstream project is OK with them being in Docker Hub, they've been reviewed by Docker team for best practices, Docker team does security checks on the images, and helps make sure security patches get applied quickly, and are generally a good choice for those looking for an image with the software they're after. It doesn't mean they're endorsed by ASF, and not even that they're necessarily strongly affiliated with the upstream project. In my mind, they sit in the same place as the Windows installer; kinda official since it's maintained by someone on the Groovy team, but also kinda unofficial since it's a convenience binary not strictly following ASF standards. Make sense? -Keegan On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Cédric Champeau <cedric.champ...@gmail.com> wrote: > Good job Keegan! > > Just nitpicking, but what does make those images official? Are they > endorsed by the ASF? > > 2017-03-02 1:37 GMT+01:00 Keegan Witt <keeganw...@gmail.com>: > >> I'm preparing to update for 2.4.9 and am considering two significant >> changes to the initial image. First, to create a volume to prevent Grape >> caches from being put into downstream images (PR #6 >> <https://github.com/groovy/docker-groovy/pull/6>), and using a user >> other than root for the container (PR #7 >> <https://github.com/groovy/docker-groovy/pull/7>). I'm pretty sure I'm >> going to do #6, should be pretty safe. But I'm still weighing #7. I wanna >> get that decided this week so that we pick something and stick with it, to >> avoid breaking anything later. Please weigh in if you have any opinion. >> >> -Keegan >> >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Well done, Keegan! >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Nice! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble >>>> .com/Official-Docker-Groovy-images-tp5738848p5738851.html >>>> Sent from the Groovy Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Guillaume Laforge >>> Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President >>> Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform >>> >>> Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/ >>> Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+ >>> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts> >>> >> >> >
Re: Official Docker Groovy images
Good job Keegan! Just nitpicking, but what does make those images official? Are they endorsed by the ASF? 2017-03-02 1:37 GMT+01:00 Keegan Witt <keeganw...@gmail.com>: > I'm preparing to update for 2.4.9 and am considering two significant > changes to the initial image. First, to create a volume to prevent Grape > caches from being put into downstream images (PR #6 > <https://github.com/groovy/docker-groovy/pull/6>), and using a user other > than root for the container (PR #7 > <https://github.com/groovy/docker-groovy/pull/7>). I'm pretty sure I'm > going to do #6, should be pretty safe. But I'm still weighing #7. I wanna > get that decided this week so that we pick something and stick with it, to > avoid breaking anything later. Please weigh in if you have any opinion. > > -Keegan > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Well done, Keegan! >> >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Nice! >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble >>> .com/Official-Docker-Groovy-images-tp5738848p5738851.html >>> Sent from the Groovy Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Guillaume Laforge >> Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President >> Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform >> >> Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/ >> Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+ >> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts> >> > >
Re: Official Docker Groovy images
I'm preparing to update for 2.4.9 and am considering two significant changes to the initial image. First, to create a volume to prevent Grape caches from being put into downstream images (PR #6 <https://github.com/groovy/docker-groovy/pull/6>), and using a user other than root for the container (PR #7 <https://github.com/groovy/docker-groovy/pull/7>). I'm pretty sure I'm going to do #6, should be pretty safe. But I'm still weighing #7. I wanna get that decided this week so that we pick something and stick with it, to avoid breaking anything later. Please weigh in if you have any opinion. -Keegan On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well done, Keegan! > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > >> Nice! >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble >> .com/Official-Docker-Groovy-images-tp5738848p5738851.html >> Sent from the Groovy Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > > > > -- > Guillaume Laforge > Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President > Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform > > Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/ > Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+ > <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts> >
Re: Official Docker Groovy images
Nice! -- View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Official-Docker-Groovy-images-tp5738848p5738851.html Sent from the Groovy Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
