Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 19, 2024. It is now read-only.

Support Kaniko builds #1777

Open
Tracked by #1534
edrandall opened this issue Jan 10, 2020 · 9 comments
Open
Tracked by #1534

Support Kaniko builds #1777

edrandall opened this issue Jan 10, 2020 · 9 comments
Labels
cat/discussion Topic of discussion status/never-stale Pin this issue to get never marked as stale by stale-bot target/JKube Implementation to be performed in JKube

Comments

@edrandall
Copy link

Description

maven-fabric8-plugin already supports docker-daemonless builds using Jib, but Jib has a limited (though useful) support of layering a Java application on top of an existing base image.

It would be really useful if this were taken to the next level with Kaniko support. We could then build our entire suite of applications using the same (fabric8) abstraction and no need for a docker daemon or d-in-d anywhere.
The main advantages of using the fabric8 plugin being that:

  • configuration is standardised
  • dependencies for running the underlying tool (Jib, Kaniko, whatever) are automatically downloaded.
@edrandall edrandall changed the title Support Kaniko Support Kaniko builds Jan 10, 2020
@rohanKanojia
Copy link
Member

@rhuss @manusa @dev-gaur @lordofthejars : What do you think about this? Can we support this use case?

@rohanKanojia rohanKanojia added the cat/discussion Topic of discussion label Jan 10, 2020
@lordofthejars
Copy link
Contributor

Well, it is similar to buildah. We could provide support for both. It is true that nowadays kaniko is getting some traction because of tekton.

@rhuss
Copy link
Contributor

rhuss commented Jan 10, 2020

Actually, the idea is really to support as many build system that makes sense. Kaniko is one of them. Ideally, that should just be different implementation of the jkube-kit buiildservice (as sketched out on the fabric8-kit github page, with a sample implementation for the current docker build). The start is here: https://github.com/fabric8io/fabric8-kit/tree/master/build

@manusa
Copy link
Member

manusa commented Jan 11, 2020

I'd like to support this build system too, but I would do it in scope of JKube.
We should make JKube image build system as abstract as possible so that concrete implementations are easy to add and don't require extra work besides invoking the implementation specific build commands from the provided common build model.

From the earlier comments I'd like to highlight and keep in mind these statements: "configuration is standardised", "support as many build system that makes sense". I think they summarize pretty much some of JKube goals and what we should be focusing on.

@manusa manusa added the target/JKube Implementation to be performed in JKube label Jan 11, 2020
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Apr 10, 2020

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any activity since 90 days. It will be closed if no further activity occurs within 7 days. Thank you for your contributions!

@stale stale bot added the status/stale Issue/PR considered to be stale label Apr 10, 2020
@devang-gaur devang-gaur added the status/never-stale Pin this issue to get never marked as stale by stale-bot label Apr 10, 2020
@stale stale bot removed the status/stale Issue/PR considered to be stale label Apr 10, 2020
@edrandall
Copy link
Author

edrandall commented Apr 10, 2020

Link back to #1534

@dloiacono
Copy link

any news about Kaniko support on Jkube ? @manusa

@edrandall
Copy link
Author

edrandall commented Nov 5, 2021

Problem with JKube is that is is not a straight migration from f8 / dmp. The approach seems to be, aim for lowest-common-denominator, removing f8 features that don't immediately fit their model, rather than maintaining support for them.
Example: eclipse-jkube/jkube#644

@manusa
Copy link
Member

manusa commented Nov 5, 2021

any news about Kaniko support on Jkube ? @manusa

Hi @dloiacono,
Support for Kaniko is tracked in eclipse-jkube/jkube#767
This is scheduled for the mid-term in our roadmap. Our current priorities are finishing up with the Gradle plugin support and improve Helm chart generation with better support for placeholders/values.

Problem with JKube is that they are not a straight migration from f8....

Hi @edrandall.
Could you be more specific about the features you are missing right now in JKube as compared to FMP? Only some very Maven specific features were dropped. Any thing else you are missing should be reported and at least considered from the project perspective.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
cat/discussion Topic of discussion status/never-stale Pin this issue to get never marked as stale by stale-bot target/JKube Implementation to be performed in JKube
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants