[buildpacks] PMC - 2015-07-27 notes

Mike Dalessio

Happy Monday,

We had a short meeting of the Buildpacks PMC today, permanent notes are at:


which I've snapshotted below.

Please note that we're going to move all Buildpacks PMC discussion to the
cf-dev@ mailing list, as discussed in today's PMC call. That is, we won't
be convening for the next month or so, and will instead communicate
transparently on the mailing list.

If you have objections or thoughts on this, please don't hesitate to reach
out to either Chip or me.



*# Buildpacks PMC Meeting 2015-06-15*

*## Agenda*

1. Update on Java Buildpack (Ryan Morgan)
2. Update on core Buildpacks and rootfs (Mike Dalessio)
3. Proposals
* `null-buildpack` deprecation
4. Open Discussion
* Moving Buildpacks PMC discussion to the mailing list

*## Attendees*

* Chip Childers, Cloud Foundry Foundation
* Stormy Peters, Cloud Foundry Foundation
* Mike Dalessio, Pivotal (PMC lead)
* Ryan Morgan, Pivotal

*## Update on Java Buildpack (Ryan Morgan)*

* Java Buildpack 3.1 released on June 25th. [Release notes](
* Work continues on support for Hardware security devices. (Safenet Luna
security provider)
* Not much work remains in the backlog, next up is migration to Concourse

*## Update on core Buildpacks and `rootfs` (Mike Dalessio)*

*__Recent work__*

Released ruby-buildpack v1.6.0, php-buildpack v4.0.0, python-buildpack
v1.5.0, nodejs-buildpack v1.5.0 and staticfile-buildpack v1.2.1, which all
contain CF-specific precompiled binaries. (NB the go-buildpack uses
Google-built binaries and we're OK with this.)

Released binary-buildpack v1.0.1 which contains Michael Fraenkel's (IBM) PR
for Diego compatibility.

Released go-buildpack 1.5.0 with a Godeps upgrade and removal of the custom
python interpreter (now uses rootfs python).

Updates to all buildpacks to remove lucid64 binaries from manifests.
Operators can use the buildpack tooling to generate these binaries and
package their own buildpacks as they deem necessary. Note that as part of
this effort, the [binary builder][] tooling was open-sourced.

Open-sourced [concourse CI pipelines][].

[Rootfs 1.1.0][] released. Note that rootfs releases are now given version
numbers and have release notes, and the corresponding docker images are
tagged with that version number.

The team has been working on a series of spikes intended to drive towards a
technical solution for implementing shared behaviors (across buildpacks)
into shared code. This work can be followed in the Tracker backlog in the
[architecture epic][].

We moved [buildpack-packager][], [machete][], and [machete-firewall-test][]
into the `cloudfoundry` org, as they're part of our core tooling. These
were previously in the deprecated `cf-buildpacks` org or were overlooked
during the initial Foundation repository cleanup.

[binary builder]: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/binary-builder
[concourse CI pipelines]: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/buildpacks-ci
[Rootfs 1.1.0]: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/stacks/releases/tag/1.1.0
[architecture epic]: https://www.pivotaltracker.com/epic/show/1898760
[buildpack-packager]: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/buildpack-packager
[machete]: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/machete

*__Upcoming work__*

The team will be experimenting with extension points to the buildpack life
cycle, for both operators and developers. Among the goals:

* allow extension of buildpack behavior by application developers without
having to fork the buildpack
* allow extension of buildpack behavior by operators which is currently not

We're also considering focused sprints for individual buildpacks.

*## Proposals*

*### `null-buildpack` deprecation*

The repository `cloudfoundry-incubator/null-buildpack` has been deprecated
by the adoption of `cloudfoundry/binary-buildpack`, and so it's being
proposed to move this to the attic or to delete it.

After a brief discussion, it was decided to place this repository in

*## Open Discussion*

*### Moving Buildpacks PMC discussion to the mailing list*

Chip and Mike noted that attendance has not been regular at the Buildpacks
PMC. Chip suggested that perhaps the Buidpacks PMC discussion could move to
the mailing list, rather than continue to have the call.

No objections from those present. We'll try using email, rather than
waiting for a PMC call, for the next month; and we'll revisit this decision
based on feedback.