Date
1 - 6 of 6
Buildpacks PMC - 2015-05-04 Notes
|
Mike Dalessio
Hi all,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
In response to several suggestions, I've moved the Buildpacks notes into markdown files in a github repo. I've created this public github repo: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/pmc-notes and the Buildpacks PMC notes will be within it, at: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/pmc-notes/tree/master/Buildpacks I've added a document to the GDrive directing visitors to the Github repo. Cheers, -m On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Mike Dalessio <mdalessio(a)pivotal.io> wrote:
Hi all, |
|
|
|
Mike Dalessio
Hi Ryan,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
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 On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ryan Morgan <ryanmorgan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Ryan Morgan <ryanmorgan@...>
Thanks for the update Mike. Can we get a bit more detail on java-buildpack
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
divergence from the other buildpacks? -Ryan On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Mike Dalessio <mdalessio(a)pivotal.io> wrote:
Hi all, |
|
|
|
Chris Sterling
Glad to see that the static and null buildpacks will be shipping with
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
cf-release soon. Chris Sterling chris.sterling(a)gmail.com twitter: @csterwa linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/chrissterling On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Mike Dalessio <mdalessio(a)pivotal.io> wrote:
Hi all, |
|
|
|
Wayne E. Seguin
The biggest issue with GDrive is that our folks in China can’t easily view them ;)
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
My question/feedback comes from the other recent thread about buildpack sizing and efficiency. I did not see a bullet point in the list below for this (unless it was covered by different wording/terminology). I would love to see a way where buildpacks can become smaller not bigger whilst still supporting the vast array of languages+versions. Thank you for including them in this email and thank you for keeping us all in the loop, much appreciated! ~Wayne Wayne E. Seguin <wayneeseguin(a)starkandwayne.com <mailto:wayneeseguin(a)starkandwayne.com>> CTO ; Stark & Wayne, LLC On May 4, 2015, at 13:50 , Mike Dalessio <mdalessio(a)pivotal.io> wrote: |
|
|
|
Mike Dalessio
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. |
|
|