Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 14, 2023. It is now read-only.

[DEP] Proposal for multiple docker builds #831

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

danmikita
Copy link

@danmikita danmikita commented Jul 5, 2018

This DEP supports Azure/draft#39

@msftclas
Copy link

msftclas commented Jul 5, 2018

CLA assistant check
All CLA requirements met.

@danmikita danmikita changed the title [DEP] Adding proposal for multiple docker builds [DEP] Proposal for multiple docker builds Jul 5, 2018
@ehotinger
Copy link

IMO both sync and parallel modes should be supported from a tool like Draft. Not all builders support parallelism because of locks around state files.

@radu-matei
Copy link
Contributor

Hey, @danmikita!
First of all, thanks for your proposal!

So if I understand this correctly, the distinction between the two modes would be done by where the chart field is - in the global Draft file or in a module?

Is there an additional way of handling this that I missed from your PR, and would it make sense to have an additional way of making the distinction between the two modes?

@danmikita
Copy link
Author

danmikita commented Dec 17, 2018

Hey @radu-matei,
We had a quick conversation at the end of your talk @ Kubecon regarding this feature.

I re-read my old DEP from this PR and the problem it is trying to solve is still very real. I approached this initially from a maven perspective and how it uses pom files, inheritance, and execution order. With that being said, adding that kind of implementation can be confusing/overwhelming and overly complex. Perhaps there are simpler approaches to supporting this functionality with a single Draft.toml file.

I am toying with the idea of just a list in the toml file that 1.) points to the sub-module(s) and 2.) defines the execution order (if needed). There is still the question of modifying the chart with multiple image build ids, as well as supporting multiple charts.

I am definitely open to other ideas about how this gets implemented and would love to dialog about it. I'd like to have a rough consensus/direction before I start implementation.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants