-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 43
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
Contributing Guide and Getting Started #6
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Vanessa Sochat <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is awesome. I scanned through it and left some comments (mostly a bunch of typo nits).
Signed-off-by: Vanessa Sochat <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Vanessa Sochat <[email protected]>
Can we move the /security.md and /code-of-conduct.md into docs as they are sort of orphaned at the root. |
Definitely! This would make sense to integrate into the front matter. I didn't touch those docs because they were in the original repo content, but happy to do this with @vbatts blessing! |
Yeah, I figured as much (why you left them). I would make the case to Mr. @vbatts that they are more compelling in a home with the rest of docs all tied into a cohesive flow now. |
|
||
A container is generally an encapsulated environment that is created from one or more binaries (images) to provide some form of isolation. Read more about [containers here]({{ site.baseurl }}docs/introduction/container-images/). | ||
|
||
## What is OCI? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would say omit this section as you have already laid out a basic navigation in the index (and left nav) to be:
- About
- Introductory Material
- Contributing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These sections are the topics for the introductory material:
- Container Images
- What is OCI
- Specification Types
- Content Addressability
- Distribution
The children of "Introductory material" one level up at:
- About
- Introductory Material
- Contributing
I would suggest that we keep an organizational structure under Introductory Material, because it's likely to grow and even need further sub topics. Is there a better title / order for this list, or just a rephrasing of the container image section, so you don't feel it is redundant?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree that the structure should be essentially
- About
- Introductory Material
- Container Images
- What is OCI --> Links to /About
- Specification Types
- Content Addressability
- Distribution
- Contributing
My comment was more that this one little paragraph "What is OCI" then just linked back to a top level 'About'. Seemingly redundant or circular.. Perhaps there is no top level /About or else we need to figure out what content should go into "What is OCI" that is different than /About
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, good call! You are saying that "About this web interface thing you are looking at" is a different beastie than "About OCI under the docs." I completely agree. Right now it links to the "About this site" page, and I think we should likely have a more verbosely written "This is what OCI is all about, history" under the docs. I think this detail is out of scope for this first go, but important!
It's because the linux containers API is pretty compiicated. Containers in linux are controlled by | ||
a Kernel API, and I found a good summary and diagram in the talk [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsYzMPptB-k#t=18m10s) picture at 18 minutes, 10 seconds. There is quite some (people-based) history behind | ||
the underlying API. Watch the same [talk a bit later](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsYzMPptB-k#t=24m45s) for another useful picture. Generally, there are two components under discussion: | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can buy these as the primary 2 topics, but I would also throw in the union filesystem as the third leg that rounds out the core concepts people need to understand.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would you be able and willing to add this via PR after merge?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Absolutely. This is why I'm eager for the PR to get at least merged in, even if not totally 'done'. Otherwise I'm manually working off of your personal repo which I can't then contribute to here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Me too! See here #9 for the move into the "docs" folder we discussed in the call.
the CoC is a canonical document, not to be confused with a projects The security.md needs to be in a folder for security process handling. There are more documents forthcoming about security disclosure process and templates for communication. So again, not just |
How about a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md in a .github folder so it’s detected by the repo, and a security folder for forthcoming security docs? |
Maybe fine? I don't want it hidden, and every other project (image-spec, runtime-spec, runc, etc.) will need to link and reference it.
yes |
Signed-off-by: Vanessa Sochat <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Vanessa Sochat <[email protected]>
On 26/02/19 15:01 +0000, Vanessasaurus wrote:
@vbatts the code of conduct in the distribution spec is in reference to the one in the opencontainers/tob repository (see [here](https://github.com/opencontainers/distribution-spec/blob/master/README.md)) is this correct / incorrect, should it be changed to the one here? The same is true for runtime and image spec. Are there different ones?
the tob CoC is moved to here. And they all ought to point here.
|
okay, I'll fix this. |
Okay just updated the runtime-spec, distribution-spec, and image-spec to link to the (updated location in .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) to be merged here: |
I haven't been using that style to format links of putting them at the bottom - I like it! I think I'll do this from now on, e.g.,:
It's so neat and tidy. |
On 26/02/19 17:15 +0000, Vanessasaurus wrote:
Okay just updated the runtime-spec, distribution-spec, and image-spec to link to the (updated location in .github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) to be merged here:
- opencontainers/image-spec#762
- opencontainers/runtime-spec#1001
- opencontainers/distribution-spec#57
Related to #3 ;-)
|
Ah, there is more to be done - I'm on it! Let me just eat these avocados first :) |
Here! Each cgroup is separately mountable. | ||
|
||
```bash | ||
ls -l /sys/fs/cgroup |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this won't age well :-)
Cgroup v2 is coming imminently and has a different layout.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let' cut it out then.
dr-xr-xr-x 6 root root 0 Aug 29 15:00 systemd | ||
``` | ||
|
||
Each of these is a folder, and the simplest one is "freezer." The way we control cgroups is via file system calls. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
perhaps some of this can just defer to the runtime-spec, as it will also vary for platform (i.e. windows)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good idea.
…ec repo Signed-off-by: Vanessa Sochat <[email protected]>
split the PR into two things: 1) move the CoC and security; 2) the web render for contributions |
|
ty! |
|
Signed-off-by: Vanessa Sochat [email protected]
This pull request (again!) will add the early start to:
Once the repository is set up, other containernerds can contribute their knowledge, and we can use the framework as a starting base for contribution. I suspect we might want to also move the oci-contribution repo to fall somewhere under the organization. The general idea is that we want a central place for issue tracking, and keeping templates to help with contribution.
GitHub pages will need to be turned on for this to deploy! Oh please robot overlords don't get angry about the signing thing... :)