Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

config: relax specification of Config.Volumes #694

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 26, 2017

Conversation

stevvooe
Copy link
Contributor

@stevvooe stevvooe commented Jun 9, 2017

Relaxes the specification of Config.Volumes by avoiding references to
the concept of "data volumes". Implementors are merely instructed to
provide mounts outside the container's root filesystem.

Signed-off-by: Stephen J Day stephen.day@docker.com

Closes #687
Supersedes #504

cc @vbatts @cyphar

@stevvooe stevvooe added this to the v1.0.0 milestone Jun 9, 2017
config.md Outdated
A set of directories which SHOULD be created as data volumes in a container running this image.
If a file or folder exists within the image with the same path as a data volume, that file or folder will be replaced by the data volume and never be merged.
A set of directories describing where the process is likely write data specific to a container instance.
Implementations SHOULD provide mounts for these locations such that application data is not written to the container's root filesystem.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In this sentence, "implementations" seems to be directed at runtime implementations, right?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was explicitly vague on purpose. Should I qualify this further?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IMO if we want to specify what a runtime should do we should put it in conversion.md, to avoid the mixing of semantics between the two.

config.md Outdated
If a file or folder exists within the image with the same path as a data volume, that file or folder will be replaced by the data volume and never be merged.
A set of directories describing where the process is likely write data specific to a container instance.
Implementations SHOULD provide mounts for these locations such that application data is not written to the container's root filesystem.
If a _new_ image is created from a container based on the image described by this configuration, data in these paths SHOULD NOT be included in the _new_ image.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So we are excluding the use case of seeding a volume?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, this is covering the case where an image is created from a running container. This is pretty awkward.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll add a line above this indicating that seeding volumes with image data is okay.

@vbatts
Copy link
Member

vbatts commented Jun 16, 2017

needs a rebase to pass tests.
a couple questions, but SGTM

@stevvooe stevvooe force-pushed the relax-volumes-specification branch from f211f5f to 950dcf5 Compare June 16, 2017 20:50
Relaxes the specification of `Config.Volumes` by avoiding references to
the concept of "data volumes". Implementors are merely instructed to
provide mounts outside the container's root filesystem.

Signed-off-by: Stephen J Day <stephen.day@docker.com>
Signed-off-by: Stephen J Day <stephen.day@docker.com>
@stevvooe stevvooe force-pushed the relax-volumes-specification branch from 950dcf5 to 8f42721 Compare June 21, 2017 21:27
@stevvooe
Copy link
Contributor Author

@vbatts PTAL. Moved to conversion. Added clause about seeding the mount.

@erikh
Copy link
Contributor

erikh commented Jun 23, 2017

Thanks for listening to my carping, I know it's a bit much at times. LGTM!

@stevvooe
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for listening to my carping, I know it's a bit much at times. LGTM!

I think this language is much better. Thanks for the feedback!

@vbatts
Copy link
Member

vbatts commented Jun 23, 2017

i think this covers this loosely enough.
LGTM

I would love to get @cyphar review as well

Approved with PullApprove

@philips
Copy link
Contributor

philips commented Jun 23, 2017

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

@stevvooe
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cyphar please... review... resisting... urge... to... merge... with... two... LGTMs.

@cyphar
Copy link
Member

cyphar commented Jun 25, 2017

Haha, thanks for pinging me @stevvooe.

LGTM, sorry for the delay (exams are fun).

@vbatts
Copy link
Member

vbatts commented Jun 26, 2017

👐

@vbatts vbatts merged commit d9ffa2f into opencontainers:master Jun 26, 2017
@stevvooe stevvooe deleted the relax-volumes-specification branch June 27, 2017 23:26
@vbatts vbatts mentioned this pull request Jul 5, 2017
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants