Merge fabric8io-images/s2i project with jboss-container-images/openjdk

[vorburger]

The https://github.com/jboss-container-images/openjdk project has essentially the same goal as this project. AFAIK it's in fact originally even based on some of the same code, but then diverged. In an ideal world, it would make sense to let this project here eventually just become an empty container extending that container, for backwards compatibility - if it's fully compatible.

I was hoping to find some time for looking more into this, but my priorities are, erm, evolving, and I'm not sure when I can get to this.. therefore opening this issue just in case anyone else perhaps wants to have a try at this. Specific goals may be:

1. manage to locally build jboss-container-images/openjdk (NB e.g. https://github.com/jboss-container-images/openjdk/issues/48)
2. run the test.sh from this project against the S2I builder image from that project, and fix any failures - in that project, not the test 😄
3. make sure jboss-container-images/openjdk has a CI/CD and pushes new ("community") images pushed to a registry, like this project does
4. empty out this project and just make its Dockerfile FROM that one
5. migrate remaining open issues from here to there

In reality it may be a little more interesting and complicated - we'll have to try and see.

Until all of that happens, this project can of course keep going in parallel - it's great to actually see new PRs from people who are clearly using this and have an interest in maintaining it.

@rhuss @jmtd

[rhuss]

@vorburger @jmtd It looks like a good idea to join forces, but I'm still unsure about the state of s2i java community images. Isn't it that there supposed to be a place within OpenJDK or has this plan changed?

I share a bit the same situation as @vorburger as I can maintain these projects only sporadically (which you can also see on my very delayed responsiveness).

But I'm all to for moving on and can help here, too.

[jmtd]

@vorburger @jmtd It looks like a good idea to join forces, but I'm still unsure about the state of s2i java community images. Isn't it that there supposed to be a place within OpenJDK or has this plan changed?

We really need to ship community versions of the OpenJDK Openshift images, yes, and we haven't yet. I originally held off whilst I got the OpenJDK 11 product image out, so the community image could benefit from any fixes that came from the QE pocess. But that was back near Christmas and the product image was delayed until yesterday (it just shipped).

I'm hoping to push an initial community JDK 11 image to the centos namespace within the next couple of days. There's still a lot of stuff to figure out about a CI process and working around the preprocessor problem (cekit)

[vorburger]

master...vorburger:issue-51_test-jboss-container-images_openjdk ==> https://github.com/jboss-container-images/openjdk/issues/62

[chirino]

@vorburger let us know where there is an upstream version of this image. We can test it out updating dependent upstream projects like syndesis: https://github.com/syndesisio/syndesis/blob/master/app/s2i/src/main/docker/Dockerfile to switch to it.

BTW it would be nice if there were fewer differences between upstream and product images. Right now things like different user id numbers really make things difficult in child images.

[vorburger]

@vorburger let us know where there is an upstream version of this image.

Check out https://hub.docker.com/r/fabric8/s2i-java/tags ... if that's what you meant by "this image"? (If you meant the upcoming "new" one, then open an issue on https://github.com/jboss-container-images/openjdk/issues instead of here to ask them re. their CE.)

updating dependent upstream projects like syndesis

you're using FROM fabric8/s2i-java:3.0-java8 over there, which seems right (for this project's image), but is a fixed version, if you want latest changes, then you can grab latest instead (which is Java 8, as it was originally, vs latest-java11); file an issue if you would like CHANGELOG to be updated, and I'll update it some time. I could do a 3.1 incl. #123.

BTW it would be nice if there were fewer differences between upstream and product images. Right now things like different user id numbers really make things difficult in child images.

just an FYI, as expressed e.g. in #221, I unfortunately don't have the cycles to maintain the product images of this project. It would be good if others could. (The exact history is not clear to me; I joined this from "outside".)