You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Yes, I agree with supporting different architectures . But do we need to support images based on different distributions. Can't we have single distribution across multiple architectures. (could be alpine/musl based image).
But do we need to support images based on different distributions. Can't we have single distribution across multiple architectures. (could be alpine/musl based image).
IMHO yes. My thoughts:
Alpine is not suited for production env and it has some security flaws. I have seen some thread where they have issues with JDK > 1.8.1 u131 - this where Java started to understand cgroups still experimental options but soon would be in mainstream.
When to increase user adoption we need to support popular distros e.g centos and debian, that makes the developer extend these images with their favorite distros
Activity
csantanapr commentedon Mar 7, 2018
Also need to consider architect to the matrix of images
s390x ppc64 arm (ie raspberry pi/edge device)
Param-S commentedon Mar 8, 2018
I see, 2 requirements,
Yes, I agree with supporting different architectures . But do we need to support images based on different distributions. Can't we have single distribution across multiple architectures. (could be alpine/musl based image).
kameshsampath commentedon Mar 8, 2018
IMHO yes. My thoughts:
Alpine is not suited for production env and it has some security flaws. I have seen some thread where they have issues with JDK > 1.8.1 u131 - this where Java started to understand
cgroupsstill experimental options but soon would be in mainstream.When to increase user adoption we need to support popular distros e.g centos and debian, that makes the developer extend these images with their favorite distros