[asterisk-dev] Asterisk Docker Containers: Phase 1

[Matthew Jordan]

<snip>


> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards <asterisk.org at sedwards.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Steve Edwards <asterisk.org at sedwards.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I wrote up a lengthy blog post that likely borders on ranting:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> http://blog.leifmadsen.com/blog/2015/11/10/asterisk-docker-container-phase-1/
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
Great blog post :-)

Would it be appropriate to summarize the current state of things as "we
need a spec file for Asterisk"?



> > I've only read the first x paragraphs (I'll read more later), and I hope
>>> I'm not flying off the handle.
>>> >
>>> > I used to make source level changes for some of my projects.
>>> Fortunately, all the functionality I now need is provided by the RPMs.
>>> >
>>> > All of my current clients are 'from packages' and I'd hate for the
>>> results of the referenced poll to lead to the demise of the packages.
>>>
>>
>> On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Leif Madsen wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what "demise" you're talking about.
>>>
>>
>> This is why I prefaced my post with 'I hope I'm not flying off the
>> handle.'
>>
>> The potential 'demise' I referred to would be for someone to read your
>> post and apply the results from a single poll with a specific demographic
>> to the general demographic.
>>
>> There is also no "poll" going on...
>>>
>>
>> 'Referenced' is past tense -- referring to the poll you referenced.
>>
>> Nothing that I'm doing will stop people from building packages, so I'm
>>> really confused by your statement.
>>>
>>
>> I get that containers do not preclude people from building packages. I
>> was not commenting on your work, only on the statement 'no one really uses
>> packages.'
>>
>> Not one thing I am proposing will change your workflow.
>>>
>>
>> I look forward to reading your post in depth when I have the time.
>>
>> Sorry for the kerfuffle.
>> <http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev>
>>
>
Just to address Steve's point:

Packages aren't going anywhere. I do think we can all agree that the state
of Asterisk packaging could use some improvement, but that's a separate
discussion.

Docker is another way to deploy Asterisk, that may or may not use packages.
(And as Chad pointed out, we're using Docker here at Digium for that
purpose.) As Leif mentioned in his blog post, there's definitely benefits
to using packages with Docker, as it reduces the size of the Docker images.
If the goal is to have a universally accepted Docker file for the Asterisk
project, then it probably make sense to use packages; that would
necessitate either having dependable packages for a variety of distros, or
include a .spec file with the project.

Leif: Does that sound correct?

Matt

-- 
Matthew Jordan
Digium, Inc. | Director of Technology
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA
Check us out at: http://digium.com & http://asterisk.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20151119/ec14f43a/attachment.html>