This is a follow-up for the meeting we had yesterday and which there are
minutes from at:
One thing that we couldn't solve without any OpenShift representative
was naming scheme for the centos images, that are based on SCL packages.
Those were originally called (mysql chosen as example):
the new versions are located under rhscl (RH internal registry) and
centos (docker hub) namespaces (variant A):
What we were thinking about yesterday was this scheme (variant B):
Reasoning for shorter/simpler naming (variant B):
* we want to hide the fact that image is using SCL, so there is no need
to distinguish between SCL and non-SCL images
* there doesn't seem to be a reason to have more variants of one
component in the image (if there will be in the future, the name itself
should be different)
* image name should be simple for users
* it is a benefit to use the same scheme as on docker hub
* distribution version underneath is usually irrelevant (except some
specific cases, like some base libraries; anyway it won't be good enough
reason to provide two variants of images just for the sake of different
libraries underneath), so the -centos7 suffix is not necessary
However, after talking to Ben from OpenShift there are actually some
arguments for using distro version and also version in the name (variant A):
* Ben claimed the distribution underneath is actually important, because
of kernel. Once there is centos8-based image, it might or might not run
on centos7 machine. Whether this happens in reality or not, we should at
least have a backdoor how to fix it.
* version in the image name instead of just tag is handy for the cases
where we want to work with :latest tag (used quite a lot in docker
world, default behaviour)
* no version in the image name also means that if users don't use tags,
they will upgrade to newer version once new version is out (which e.g.
in case of mysql 5.6 to 5.7 upgrade can cause troubles).
* since RH internal naming is not expected to be changed, the new
suggested variant will be more confusing for users, since they won't
understand that rhscl/mysql-56-rhel7 is the same image as centos/mysql:5.6.
* Ben also mentioned users haven't had problems with image naming so far
Since there is no ideal solution, we may consider also some compromise,
..and have tags for the distribution (centos7) same as centos base image
has, which would be a solution for the case distribution would matter
once in the future.
The general rule for the image name in the centos would be:
use <pkgname> for cases where version of the image doesn't care
use <pkgname>-<majorversion> for cases where version of the image
matters, where it is expected that users will require a specific version
of the image and upgrading to a newer version must be always under their
What do you think?
WG meeting should be at 17:00 UTC (13:00 EST, 19:00 Brno, 13:00 Boston,
2:00+1d Tokyo, 3:00+1d Brisbane) in #fedora-meeting-2 on Freenode.
= Topics =
* ??? do we have anything we want to talk about today?
I've prepared following repository to describe and help everybody
understand how we can work with Github with respect to Docker Hub Automated
Please read it, watch the video and let me know what do you miss, I'll add
I also added most of the WG members as contributors and will be happy to
add you also to Docker Hub organization so that you can try to setup the
builds - I will just need you account name on Docker Hub.
Architect - Senior Software Engineer
Brno, Czech Republic
Phone: +420 739 666 824
Hi Scott (and others),
we touched a topic about docker images naming (and possibly tags)
conventions on centos meeting today. It seems users will benefit from
having similar conventions in centos and fedora on docker hub, so they
can easily identify images that are supposed to work the same.
We may talk about it tomorrow on Env & Stacks meeting, which will start
at 17:00 UTC (#fedora-meeting-2). Does it seem like a good idea? Are you
able to make it?