A clarification needed for the actionloop based runtimes

[Michele Sciabarra <mi...@sciabarra.com>]

Just to make clear the situation

- I initially developed the runtime "actioloop" and made available on DockerHub
- PHP and Python used this
- I then developed a few more runtimes and I created an image actionloop-v2
- Rust and Java runtimes used actionloop-v2 image
- Matt objected to this situation
- I provided patches do avoid using the docker image altogether, and I provided patches for all the runtime to use the actioloop from sources using the released sources on github
- NOT ALL THE PATCHES has been merged

So currently the removal of the actionloop and actionloop-v2 base images worries me a bit.

Ideally all the patches for all the runtimes that builds the actionloop from sources should be merge before the removal of the actionloop base image from Docker Hub

-- 
  Michele Sciabarra
  michele@sciabarra.com

Re: A clarification needed for the actionloop based runtimes

[David P Grove <gr...@us.ibm.com>]

"Michele Sciabarra" <mi...@sciabarra.com> wrote on 07/06/2019 07:30:59
AM:
>
> So currently the removal of the actionloop and actionloop-v2 base
> images worries me a bit.
>
> Ideally all the patches for all the runtimes that builds the
> actionloop from sources should be merge before the removal of the
> actionloop base image from Docker Hub
>

If there are reasons for keeping the docker hub repositories, there is no
rush to remove them.

The only time-sensitive aspect was to get our use of the `latest` tag into
compliance.  For all the runtime repositories, `latest` was just an alias
for a git-hash tagged image, so removing latest didn't actually remove any
images from dockerhub, just a second name for one image.

Sorry if this was not clear,

-dave