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.

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

Upgrade alpine to v3.5 in Dockerfile #1633

Merged

Conversation

PeterDaveHello
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@lunny lunny added this to the 1.2.0 milestone Apr 28, 2017
@lunny lunny added the type/enhancement An improvement of existing functionality label Apr 28, 2017
@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented Apr 28, 2017

@tboerger any idea?

@tboerger tboerger added the lgtm/need 2 This PR needs two approvals by maintainers to be considered for merging. label Apr 28, 2017
@tboerger
Copy link
Member

Please update also the base image for rpi to a proper 3.5 image

@PeterDaveHello
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tboerger I don't think it has v3.5, the last time it's updated was 9 months ago:
https://hub.docker.com/r/hypriot/rpi-alpine-scratch/tags/

Did I miss anything?

@sapk
Copy link
Member

sapk commented Apr 29, 2017

multiarch/alpine could be used as a replacement of hypriot ?

@PeterDaveHello
Copy link
Contributor Author

Maybe, but it'll be another issue?

@sapk
Copy link
Member

sapk commented Apr 29, 2017

I think that if one image of gitea is updated the others should have the same treatment in the same time (same PR) to be consistent. We just have to clarify which new base for arm and I am maybe a little to new in the maintainers to choose the one ^^.

@tboerger
Copy link
Member

The mulriarch image sounds good.

@ptman
Copy link
Contributor

ptman commented May 4, 2017

Fix vs. improvement? First update to 3.5. Later change it to improve more architectures?

@tboerger
Copy link
Member

tboerger commented May 4, 2017

Fix vs. improvement? First update to 3.5. Later change it to improve more architectures?

It's all about using a more up2date base image. So nothing really about more architectures to support.

@PeterDaveHello
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tboerger so you want me to change rpi base image here?

@sapk
Copy link
Member

sapk commented May 4, 2017

@PeterDaveHello I wouldn't talk for @tboerger but he say that multiarch is good so please update multiarch/alpine:armhf-v3.5 for .rpi and multiarch/alpine:aarch64-v3.5 for .aarch64

@tboerger
Copy link
Member

tboerger commented May 4, 2017

@PeterDaveHello I wouldn't talk for @tboerger but he say that multiarch is good so please update multiarch/alpine:armhf-v3.5 for .rpi and multiarch/alpine:aarch64-v3.5 for .aarch64

That's exactly what I mean :)

@PeterDaveHello PeterDaveHello force-pushed the Upgrade-to-alpine-v3.5-in-Docker branch from 54560b5 to 79fbb08 Compare May 4, 2017 17:52
@PeterDaveHello
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated!

@sapk
Copy link
Member

sapk commented May 4, 2017

LGTM

@tboerger tboerger added lgtm/need 1 This PR needs approval from one additional maintainer to be merged. and removed lgtm/need 2 This PR needs two approvals by maintainers to be considered for merging. labels May 4, 2017
@tboerger
Copy link
Member

tboerger commented May 4, 2017

LGTM

@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented May 5, 2017

let L-G-T-M work

@tboerger tboerger added lgtm/done This PR has enough approvals to get merged. There are no important open reservations anymore. and removed lgtm/need 1 This PR needs approval from one additional maintainer to be merged. labels May 5, 2017
@lunny lunny merged commit a503947 into go-gitea:master May 5, 2017
@PeterDaveHello PeterDaveHello deleted the Upgrade-to-alpine-v3.5-in-Docker branch May 5, 2017 05:12
@sapk sapk mentioned this pull request May 9, 2017
@go-gitea go-gitea locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 23, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
lgtm/done This PR has enough approvals to get merged. There are no important open reservations anymore. type/enhancement An improvement of existing functionality
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants