Hi Ryan,
Thanks for asking this question.
The "risk" called out in the inception encompassed a number of things, but
what they really all boil down to is that the java-buildpacks team has its
own roadmap and conventions; and the two teams don't often communicate
about sharing resources, infrastructure, or planning.
I think a reasonable first step is for you and I (and maybe JT and Ben, the
engineering anchors for each team) to have a regular chat on our calendars.
I'd prefer not to get bitten by Conway's Law if we can easily mitigate this
risk. I'll ship you a calendar invite; as well as make sure the
java-buildpack team, as well as voting members of the PMC, are represented
in the next inception or roadmap discussion.
-m
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ryan Morgan <ryanmorgan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for the update Mike. Can we get a bit more detail on
java-buildpack divergence from the other buildpacks?
-Ryan
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Mike Dalessio <mdalessio(a)pivotal.io>
wrote:
Hi all,
We held the first Buildpacks PMC meeting today; I'd like to share the
agenda and notes.
For reference, all agendas notes for the Buildpacks PMC will be kept in a
public Google Drive folder at this URL:
http://bit.ly/cf-buildpacks-pmc
I realize GDrive isn't the most convenient medium for some in the CF
community; I'd love to hear how we can better support transparency for
everyone.
Please feel free to respond with comments and questions!
Cheers,
-m
----
Attendees:
-
Chip Childers, Cloud Foundry Foundation
-
Mike Dalessio, Pivotal (PMC lead)
-
Christopher Ferriss, IBM
-
Michael Fraenkel, IBM
-
Mark Kropf, Pivotal
Recent Inception Report and Stated Goals
The Buildpacks core development team held a project inception on
2015-04-20, to gain a shared understanding of upcoming goals and tracks of
work.
Goals
- Expand supported ecosystem to include more languages & frameworks
- Cloud Foundry ownership of Buildpacks
- Leverage new primitives in Diego (“app lifecycle”)
- Enable 3rd party extensions to the Developer experience
- Enable application developer extensions to the Developer
experience
- Set patterns for creating new buildpacks and for extending the
Developer experience
- Generate clearer diagnostics during staging
- Enable Operator ease of updating common dependencies
- Keep the `bin/detect` experience: buildpacks should Just Work™
- Exert more ownership over the rootfs
- Binary buildpack support
Risks
- java-buildpack is diverging quickly from the core buildpacks
- Lack of deep experience in some ecosystems
- Wide variety in implementations across buildpacks
- rootfs: with great power comes great responsibility (e.g.,
security response)
- tight coupling between buildpacks and rootfs
- versioning between buildpacks and rootfs
Current Backlog and Priorities
See https://www.pivotaltracker.com/n/projects/1042066
Notable near-term goals:
-
staticfile-buildpack support in `cf-release`
-
binary buildpack (a.k.a. “null buildpack”) support in `cf-release`
-
ability to generate and test CF rootfs-specific binaries; and tooling
for CF operators to do the same
Proposal: Buildpack Incubation Process
Discussion today for PMC input; a draft document will be circulated for
comment to cf-dev@ mailing list after the meeting, in a separate thread.
_______________________________________________
cf-dev mailing list
cf-dev(a)lists.cloudfoundry.org
https://lists.cloudfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/cf-dev
