Closed bs-matil closed 4 years ago
The long term goal is to replace the old docker images, but until all features are contained in the new approach, they will be placed in /docker-images-backend
.
docker-images-backend/README.md
:after building the "old" docker images and building the new docker images with
$ cd ./v2/docker-images-backend
$ docker-compose build
one can start a working deployment with:
$ cd ./v2
$ ( cd /PATH/TO/SW360; mvn package -DskipTests )
$ find /PATH/TO/SW360/frontend -name '*.war' -exec cp -v {} ../_deploy \;
$ docker-compose -f docker-images-backend/docker-compose.yaml -f docker-images-frontend/docker-compose.yaml up
After that SW360 can be accessed on https://localhost:8443
.
/docker-images-v2
.
actually it will be /docker-images-backend
actually it will be /docker-images-backend
Oh, I missed the renaming. This PR should then add text to the top level README.md
, and describe the situation and that there is currently redundancy.
can you do so?
alternatively we can also rename back to v2?
I did some testing with this PR and deployed sw360-backend to our internal GKE cluster. Couple of points:
In v2/docker-images-backend/backend/Dockerfile
specific commit or branch have to be checked out before building since the changes with Liferay 7.
What is the reason why rest is not deployed to backend container? Should there be an additional container for rest?
- In
v2/docker-images-backend/backend/Dockerfile
specific commit or branch have to be checked out before building since the changes with Liferay 7.
But the container here only build the backend and exclude everything from Liferay. How does the LR7 migration result in problems?
- What is the reason why rest is not deployed to backend container? Should there be an additional container for rest?
Yes, there are other containers for rest, which are not yet contributed and waiting for the merge of this PR. They are part of the frontend.
In the SW360 tech call we talked about this PR, and the conclusion was that it should be merged. Based on this, I would then try to update the chores project to the current state of SW360.
Any objections against merging?
no ...
We would like to seperate the thrift backend from anything else which has following advantages: