On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Federico Schwindt <[email protected]> wrote: > > Call me paranoid but I'd feel more reassured knowing it's coming from the > same source. >
I can understand that. I'll say there is review for official images by Docker repository leaders, so not just any image that installs Varnish would be accepted. Also, we welcome anyone running the Varnish project to take the reigns here, collaborate with us, or offer feedback. :) On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Federico Schwindt <[email protected]> wrote: > Regarding the Dockerfile itself, as you are aware since Varnish 4.0 you > don't need the sources to build VMODs. > If a VMOD still requires the sources it extremely likely it won't build > with 4.0 and having the sources won't change that. > This feedback came up in a conversation on varnish-misc <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-misc/2015-December/024670.html> about the Dockerfile. libvmod-querystring doesn't support the 4.0 installation process <https://github.com/Dridi/libvmod-querystring/issues/16>, which I've successfully built and used with 4.0. For now, installing from source is a good default for backwards compatibility and offers a simple upgrade path. Is there a resource for describing to vmod authors how to use the new 4.0 installation process? If the Varnish project would like to see vmod authors use the new 4.0 installation process, we should do an audit on the official vmod directory to see which vmods don't use it, and usher them along on the path to adopting. Eric Lewis Web Developer, Interactive News The New York Times 620 Eighth Avenue, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10018 Office: (212) 556-2081 Cell: (610) 715-8560
_______________________________________________ varnish-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
