Closed ekcasey closed 5 years ago
@ekcasey Great story 👍
@mgibson1121 @ekcasey Thoughts on alignment for the output? Any opposition to something like this?
Stack ID: io.buildpacks.stacks.bionic
Maintainer: Cloud Native Buildpacks
Desciption: Minimal bionic images
Build Image: cnbs/build:bionic
Run Image: cnbs/run:bionic
@ameyer-pivotal lgtm, but upon re-reading, maybe description should be first?
@mgibson1121 FYI, we decided against the alignment suggestion because it looked weird
This story passes acceptance
done on master
, will ship in v0.3.0
Background Assumptions
pack
support both app developers and buildpacks authors.We expect: # of app developers >> # of buildpack authors >> # of stack maintainers
Therefore our users will naturally include app developers who want to consume a builder image and a smaller contingent of buildpack authors who want to consume a stack.
(we don't meaningfully support the use cases of stack maintainers yet)
Problem statement:
When buildpack authors are creating a builder, the
stack
section of thebuilder.toml
is required. However, it's currently hard to discover what existing stacks are available to use. This might lead users to try to create their own stack when an existing stack could have worked for them, which is less than ideal (they won't get the security benefits of using a maintained stack, and support and guidance for creating a stack is slim).Proposed Solution:
In the same way that
pack suggest-builders
helps app developers find an appropriate builder image (complete with buildpacks),pack suggest-stacks
can help aspiring buildpack authors find an appropriate stack.When I run
pack suggest-stacks
Then I see the following output