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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Switch from GCR to DockerHub #406

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 25, 2020
Merged

Switch from GCR to DockerHub #406

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 25, 2020

Conversation

HeavyWombat
Copy link
Contributor

Fix #404

Based on a discussion in paketo buildpacks slack, it seems the Google Container Registry will not be used anymore some time in the near future. They recommend switching to DockerHub, where the same images are hosted.

Replace all occurrences of gcr.io/paketo-buildpacks with the DockerHub alternative docker.io/paketobuildpacks.

Update link to DockerHub images list.

@qu1queee @HeavyWombat
Switch from GCR to DockerHub
306f7bb 
Based on a discussion in https://paketobuildpacks.slack.com/archives/CULAS8ACD/p1600670275004100
it seems the Google Container Registry will not be used anymore some
time in the near future. They recommend switching to DockerHub, where
the same images are hosted.

Replace all occurrences of `gcr.io/paketo-buildpacks` with the
DockerHub alternative `docker.io/paketobuildpacks`.

Update link to DockerHub images list.

Signed-off-by: Matthias Diester <matthias.diester@de.ibm.com>
@qu1queee
Copy link
Contributor

@kvedurmu fyi

@qu1queee qu1queee requested review from zhangtbj and removed request for adambkaplan and gabemontero September 24, 2020 15:03
@kvedurmu
Copy link

Thanks for making this change! Just want to point out that docker.io/paketobuildpacks/builder:latest corresponds to the Full Paketo Builder. For readability, I'd suggest, using docker.io/paketobuildpacks/builder:full.

If you're interested in supporting builds off the Tiny or Base stacks check out https://github.com/paketo-buildpacks/builder for locations of all of the builders (this will also be documented on paketo.io soon)

@qu1queee
Copy link
Contributor

@kvedurmu thanks, we verified this, actually docker.io/paketobuildpacks/builder:latest and docker.io/paketobuildpacks/builder:full are not the same, one have the cflinux stack the other bionic. However docker.io/paketobuildpacks/builder:full-cf and docker.io/paketobuildpacks/builder:latest are the same. This commit is just to ensure we move to the right registry, then we will investigate the impact of moving to docker.io/paketobuildpacks/builder:full because of the stack change, only until that is verified, we will move to the full tag.

@qu1queee qu1queee self-requested a review September 25, 2020 06:49
@qu1queee
Copy link
Contributor

Merging this because it was done using git-duet. No need to wait for more reviewers in my opinion

@qu1queee
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 25, 2020
@qu1queee
Copy link
Contributor

/approve

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: qu1queee

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 25, 2020
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit d263084 into shipwright-io:master Sep 25, 2020
@HeavyWombat HeavyWombat deleted the switch-container-registry branch September 28, 2020 13:04
qu1queee added a commit to qu1queee/build that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2020
@qu1queee
Move to Paketo full tag builder image
a42b45c 
This is a follow up from shipwright-io#406

I tested if the container images that we build with Paketo can be deployed
with the bionic stack via [test branch](6ff4ece).

Moving from `builder:latest` to `builder:full` means that we are gonna stop
running on top of a cflinuxfs3 stack in favor of a bionic stack.

Paketo community mentioned that the bionic stack have parity with cflinuxfs3,
therefore this is a safe change, plus the deployment validations I did.
@qu1queee qu1queee mentioned this pull request Oct 7, 2020
Merged
qu1queee added a commit to qu1queee/build that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2020
@qu1queee
Move to Paketo full tag builder image
4521bfa 
This is a follow up from shipwright-io#406

I tested if the container images that we build with Paketo can be deployed
with the bionic stack via [test branch](6ff4ece).

Moving from `builder:latest` to `builder:full` means that we are gonna stop
running on top of a cflinuxfs3 stack in favor of a bionic stack.

Paketo community mentioned that the bionic stack have parity with cflinuxfs3,
therefore this is a safe change, plus the deployment validations I did.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@zhangtbj zhangtbj Awaiting requested review from zhangtbj

@qu1queee qu1queee Awaiting requested review from qu1queee

Assignees

@qu1queee qu1queee

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

About buildpack builder image, we may need to switch to docker.io instead of gcr.io
5 participants
@HeavyWombat @qu1queee @kvedurmu @openshift-ci-robot @openshift-merge-robot