|
In general, CNCF hasn't paid for infrastructure, so I think if we were going to do something like that, we should talk about it generally.
However, in this case, as was noted, I think the effect is minimal to non-existent, since by definition any image that hasn't been pulled in 6 months is pretty low-impact.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Frederick Kautz via lists.cncf.io <frederick=kautz.dev@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 10:01 AM
To: saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...>
Cc: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>; Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention
Adding to this, sccording to the faq, inactive images are defined as images that have not been pulled or pushed in at least 6 months.
This could still break things, but shouldn't be too disruptive for active projects. However, old images which should probably be retained/archived could disappear.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, 9:28 AM saiyam pathak < Saiyam911@...> wrote:
I think the FAQ states that only the inactive images will be scheduled for deletion.
What will happen to inactive images once the expiration date is reached?
Beginning November 1, 2020, any images that are marked as “inactive” will be scheduled for deletion. Account owners will also be notified by email of “inactive” images that are scheduled for deletion.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:53 PM Chris Aniszczyk < caniszczyk@...> wrote:
This is more of a question for CNCF Staff than the TOC :)
I haven't fully read the policy yet to understand the impact but we are happy to offer options, some projects have paid plans already.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 11:19 AM Yuri Shkuro < shkuro@...> wrote:
Starting Nov 1, 2020, Docker is planning to limit retention of images on Docker Hub for free accounts to 6m [1]. This will likely affect many CNCF projects that distribute binaries. For example, while the Jaeger projects makes multiple releases per year, it
does not mean that all users are upgrading more frequently than 6m. We also have a number of build and CI related images that are not updated that often, and if they start TTL-ing out it will introduce additional maintenance burden.
What is the TOC recommendation on this front? Should CNCF upgrade some of Docker Hub accounts (e.g. starting with graduated projects) to paid plans?
[1]: https://www.docker.com/pricing/retentionfaq
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
--
|
|
|
I wonder, whether this is the right timing to discuss running a dedicated registry for CNCF projects.
The CNCF is already working on the arfifact hub project. This could be the first real use case for the project. While the initial scope was different, I think it is well worth exploring
this route.
// Alois
From:
cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...>
Date: Thursday, 13. August 2020 at 19:09
To: saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...>, frederick@... <frederick@...>
Cc: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>, Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...>, CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention
In general, CNCF hasn't paid for infrastructure, so I think if we were going to do something like that, we should talk about it generally.
However, in this case, as was noted, I think the effect is minimal to non-existent, since by definition any image that hasn't been pulled in 6 months is pretty low-impact.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Frederick Kautz via lists.cncf.io <frederick=kautz.dev@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 10:01 AM
To: saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...>
Cc: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>; Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention
Adding to this, sccording to the faq, inactive images are defined as images that have not been pulled or pushed in at least 6 months.
This could still break things, but shouldn't be too disruptive for active projects. However, old images which should probably be retained/archived could disappear.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, 9:28 AM saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...> wrote:
I think the FAQ states that only the inactive images will be scheduled for deletion.
What will happen to inactive images once the expiration date is reached?
Beginning November 1, 2020, any images that are marked as “inactive” will be scheduled for deletion. Account owners will also be notified
by email of “inactive” images that are scheduled for deletion.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:53 PM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
This is more of a question for CNCF Staff than the TOC :)
I haven't fully read the policy yet to understand the impact but we are happy to offer options, some projects have paid plans already.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 11:19 AM Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...> wrote:
Starting Nov 1, 2020, Docker is planning to limit retention of images on Docker Hub for free accounts to 6m [1]. This will likely affect many CNCF projects that distribute binaries. For example, while the Jaeger projects makes multiple
releases per year, it does not mean that all users are upgrading more frequently than 6m. We also have a number of build and CI related images that are not updated that often, and if they start TTL-ing out it will introduce additional maintenance burden.
What is the TOC recommendation on this front? Should CNCF upgrade some of Docker Hub accounts (e.g. starting with graduated projects) to paid plans?
[1]: https://www.docker.com/pricing/retentionfaq
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
--
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
The CNCF is already working on the arfifact hub project. This could be the first real use case for the project.
The artifact hub already has a "real" use case. That is to make it easier to discover cloud native artifacts for those end-users who consume them. These artifacts are often distributed and hosted all over. Discoverability is a problem.
I would instead suggest a more appropriate path would be for the CNCF to host a Harbor instance (or set of instances) if it's going to use CNCF projects for this. Harbor happens to be graduated rather sandbox which means it's more mature. People pulling images for CNCF projects would want something more mature.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020, at 4:28 AM, Reitbauer, Alois via lists.cncf.io wrote:
I wonder, whether this is the right timing to discuss running a dedicated registry for CNCF projects.
The CNCF is already working on the arfifact hub project. This could be the first real use case for the project. While the initial scope was different, I think it is well worth exploring
this route.
// Alois
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...>
Date: Thursday, 13. August 2020 at 19:09
To: saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...>, frederick@... <frederick@...>
Cc: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>, Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...>, CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention In general, CNCF hasn't paid for infrastructure, so I think if we were going to do something like that, we should talk about it generally.
However, in this case, as was noted, I think the effect is minimal to non-existent, since by definition any image that hasn't been pulled in 6 months is pretty low-impact.
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Frederick Kautz via lists.cncf.io <frederick=kautz.dev@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 10:01 AM
To: saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...>
Cc: Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>; Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...>; CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cncf-toc] CNCF position on new Docker policy limiting image retention Adding to this, sccording to the faq, inactive images are defined as images that have not been pulled or pushed in at least 6 months.
This could still break things, but shouldn't be too disruptive for active projects. However, old images which should probably be retained/archived could disappear.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, 9:28 AM saiyam pathak <Saiyam911@...> wrote:
I think the FAQ states that only the inactive images will be scheduled for deletion.
What will happen to inactive images once the expiration date is reached?
Beginning November 1, 2020, any images that are marked as “inactive” will be scheduled for deletion. Account owners will also be notified
by email of “inactive” images that are scheduled for deletion.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:53 PM Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
This is more of a question for CNCF Staff than the TOC :)
I haven't fully read the policy yet to understand the impact but we are happy to offer options, some projects have paid plans already.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 11:19 AM Yuri Shkuro <shkuro@...> wrote:
Starting Nov 1, 2020, Docker is planning to limit retention of images on Docker Hub for free accounts to 6m [1]. This will likely affect many CNCF projects that distribute binaries. For example, while the Jaeger projects makes multiple
releases per year, it does not mean that all users are upgrading more frequently than 6m. We also have a number of build and CI related images that are not updated that often, and if they start TTL-ing out it will introduce additional maintenance burden.
What is the TOC recommendation on this front? Should CNCF upgrade some of Docker Hub accounts (e.g. starting with graduated projects) to paid plans?
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
--
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received
it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Dynatrace Austria GmbH (registration number FN 91482h) is a company registered in Linz whose registered office is at 4020 Linz, Austria, Am Fünfundzwanziger Turm 20
|
|
|
