search

aerogear / datasync-starter

GraphQL Low Code React and Node.js DataSync Application template
http://graphback.dev
MIT License
32 stars 38 forks source link

Datasync next #444

Closed wtrocki closed 3 years ago

wtrocki commented 4 years ago

@machi1990 This is still work in progress but we should use this branch for the collaboration on phase 1. No force pushes :D

machi1990 commented 4 years ago

@machi1990 This is still work in progress but we should use this branch for the collaboration on phase 1. No force pushes :D

May the force be with you :dagger: :-D

machi1990 commented 4 years ago

@wtrocki I was planning to update the base image to registry.redhat.io/rhel8/nodejs-12 but I am getting authorization issues when trying to build the new Datasync image.

docker build . -t test
Sending build context to Docker daemon  125.4kB
Step 1/7 : FROM registry.redhat.io/rhel8/nodejs-12
Get https://registry.redhat.io/v2/rhel8/nodejs-12/manifests/latest: unauthorized: Please login to the Red Hat Registry using your Customer Portal credentials. Further instructions can be found here: https://access.redhat.com/RegistryAuthentication

I'll probably need to sign in to the registry.redhat.io register for me to complete my testing, but wanted to know if we've access to the credentials?

wtrocki commented 4 years ago

Ah.. Those images are not comming from quay they coming from different registry. I would use some other images if possible: https://catalog.redhat.com/software/containers/rhscl/nodejs-10-rhel7/5baa36dbbed8bd6ee81a09c7

I know some of them are available on vanilla openshift so they should work without dev account. Logging to dev account is ok, but it will be too much hassle for CI etc.

machi1990 commented 4 years ago

Ah.. Those images are not comming from quay they coming from different registry. I would use some other images if possible:

Nope, they are coming from redhat.registry.io and the registry needs one to be logged in.

https://catalog.redhat.com/software/containers/rhscl/nodejs-10-rhel7/5baa36dbbed8bd6ee81a09c7

I know some of them are available on vanilla openshift so they should work without dev account.

I could update the base image to node:14 and revisit this part later on as I am currently checking on the openshift template for mongo.

Logging to dev account is ok, but it will be too much hassle for CI etc.

Exactly.

machi1990 commented 4 years ago

@wtrocki I am looking to test https://github.com/aerogear/datasync-starter/pull/444/commits/5758ab0ece6d7c343bd144df2facb6835cd4c7a5 next. But if you can review it, would be very much appreciated.

wtrocki commented 4 years ago

@machi1990 This docker image will not work with s2i process for building container. We might avoid using S2i for the moment and work on the template only, but generally this will be not red hat way of doing things. Good for demo but it might prevent us from merging this change.

machi1990 commented 4 years ago

@machi1990 This docker image will not work with s2i process for building container. We might avoid using S2i for the moment and work on the template only, but generally this will be not red hat way of doing things. Good for demo but it might prevent us from merging this change.

Thanks for checking it out. Sure, we can ignore s2i for the moment unless otherwise we'll want to bring it into the demo (which I think we should not).

Just for my own knowledge: I've never used s2i before so I might not have an idea which part of the Dockerfile may not work with s2i. Is it the multistage part?

wtrocki commented 4 years ago

Just for my own knowledge: I've never used s2i before so I might not have an idea which part of the Dockerfile may not work with s2i. Is it the multistage part?

@machi1990 This is not technical. We will use this image.

We work in demo setup so I guess we will not merge this branch for a while

machi1990 commented 4 years ago

Just for my own knowledge: I've never used s2i before so I might not have an idea which part of the Dockerfile may not work with s2i. Is it the multistage part?

@machi1990 This is not technical.

Thanks. I got you.

wtrocki commented 4 years ago

@machi1990 I think we should theat this branch as feature branch with no direct commits from now on since it will be hard to review it and track progress.

machi1990 commented 4 years ago

@machi1990 I think we should theat this branch as feature branch with no direct commits from now on since it will be hard to review it and track progress.

Sure. I've a small change that make the model in a config map a variable. I'll push it in a separate branch then