Re: geonode-devel Digest, Vol 44, Issue 4

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: geonode-devel Digest, Vol 44, Issue 4

Thomas Gertin-2
This sounds great, I would like to volunteer to help with testing.

I also think it is a good idea to create a video walk-through of a docker deployment once it is finished.

-Tom Gertin

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 6, 2018, at 8:23 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Send geonode-devel mailing list submissions to
>    [hidden email]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geonode-devel
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    [hidden email]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    [hidden email]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of geonode-devel digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Docker Strategy Chat (Toni Schönbuchner)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 14:23:43 +0200
> From: Toni Schönbuchner <[hidden email]>
> To: geonode-devel <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [GeoNode-devel] Docker Strategy Chat
> Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Olivier,
>
> thanks for sharing your plans. Your ideas read well thought out.
> What do you have in mind with:
>
>> We'd need to find a good name for it - suggestions welcome.
>
> A codename like  'GeoNode Pacific' ;)
>
> Or a branch name to just distinguish from master branch?
> If so why not just stay close to yours ~ master-spc, or master-le (let´s encrypt).
> docker-next or docker+?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Toni
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------
> CSGIS
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Kolonnadenstraße 1
> 04109 Leipzig
> -----------------------------------------------
> Mobil    +49/ (0) 176 6680 3198
> Tel        +49/ (0) 341 24 04 738
> Fax        +49/ (0) 341 24 04 73
> Web        http://csgis.de
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Hinweis gemäß § 33 BDSG
> Daten der Verfahrensbeteiligten werden gespeichert. Dieses Dokument ist ausschließlich für den
> Adressaten bestimmt. Der Inhalt der E-Mail ist vertraulich. Falls Sie diese E-Mail versehentlich
> erhalten haben, rufen Sie uns unter obiger Rufnummer umgehend an und löschen Sie diese Nachricht
> von Ihrem Computer. Jegliche Art von Reproduktionen, Verbreitung, Vervielfältigung, Veränderung,
> Verteilung und/oder Veröffentlichung dieser E-Mail ist verboten.
>
>> Am 06.09.2018 um 12:22 schrieb [hidden email]:
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 11:49:31 +1000
>> From: Olivier Dalang <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>> To: geonode-devel <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>> Subject: Re: [GeoNode-devel] Docker Strategy Chat
>> Message-ID:
>>    <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi all !
>>
>> Some time has passed since we last discussed deployment with Docker. I'm
>> still willing to work on officially supporting docker deployment for
>> Geonode.
>>
>> To move forward on the docker deployment, I suggest a two phase strategy.
>>
>> 1/ copy over the SPCgeonode repo to the geonode organization (more or less
>> as is) and document that deployment method as an official one l (but in
>> beta state). We'd need to find a good name for it - suggestions welcome.
>> 2/ work on making the SPCgeonode setup and the setup in the main repo
>> converge, with the end goal of removing the docker deployment repo
>> altogether and have everything in the main repo, using the same
>> docker-compose, with a docker-compose.deploy.yml that adds deployment
>> specific elements (https, backups)
>>
>> 1/ could happen very soon (maybe even before next release), while 2/ would
>> take more time, as it requires to go carefully through both implementations
>> and take the best of both.
>>
>> I think this would accommodate both the goal of having a ready deployment
>> method soon, and the final goal of having the deployment method use the
>> same docker images than dev, without being disruptive for users currently
>> relying on the docker images.
>>
>> The reason why I think we must do it in 2 steps is that IMO, while good for
>> development, the current setup in the main repo still requires significant
>> work until it's usable as a base for deployment (docker images are too
>> heavy, split across many repos, images not properly versioned,
>> non-production ready elements such as static files being served by django,
>> no ci, etc.). That's not mentioning the additional steps needed for a
>> deployment meeting basic good practice requirements (https, backups...).
>>
>> I would definitely be able to support the work on this as part of my
>> current activities. I also believe it meets a high demand from the
>> community (this is more or less my only serious contribution to Geonode, so
>> that I take my election in PSC a clear sign of that demand).
>>
>> Francesco, would that 2 steps strategy be OK as you were keen to have the
>> spcgeonode setup reuse as much as possible existing docker setups ?
>>
>> Let me know what you think. Let's discuss this, and if needed vote during
>> next PSC (though if we reach consensus before that it's even better).
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Olivier
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geonode-devel/attachments/20180906/cdea0902/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> geonode-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geonode-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of geonode-devel Digest, Vol 44, Issue 4
> ********************************************
_______________________________________________
geonode-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geonode-devel