Paketo Buildpacks Working Group, 30 May 2023

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Working Group: May 30th 2023

Description

5/30 Meeting
Attendees
Ozzy Osborne(Red Hat)
Jan von Löwenstein (SAP SE)
Kevin Ortega (IBM)
Sophie Wigmore (VMware)
Bob Lockwood (Capital One)
Arjun Sreedharan (VMware)
Agenda
Standing Items
Designate note takerArjun
New FacesNo new faces
Review Outstanding RFCs (see notes at each PR)Removal of yj from stacksWaiting for stacks maintainer approval
Decouple dependenciesForest (OP) not in today
Multi-arch buildpacks
Jerico: Looking for inputs from the steering committee if we wanna move forward with this? Ready to add examples.
Sophie will ping the steering committee
Bionic End of Support
Looking for approval from all subteams
CNB Updates & Questions
No new updates
Project Update
No new updates
Open mic questions/discussion topics
Michael in advance since I could not make the meeting - A number of PRs related to libnodejs that need a review
Add function to get version from package.json Npm start script override move function to find applications into libnodejs Michael - Red Hat team needs to discuss with somebody on https://github.com/paketo-community/ubi-base-stack/pull/1. Who would be the best person to talk to about this?Sophie: Stacks maintainers (https://github.com/paketo-buildpacks/community/blob/main/TEAMS.md#stacks-team)
Proposal to align Paketo buildpack logging output: https://github.com/paketo-buildpacks/nodejs/issues/766Jan: Nodejs has a different log output format compared to Java for example. No unified logging standard.
Sophie: Would be great to have an RFC for the unified format.Thinking ahead to stack removal: https://github.com/buildpacks/spec/pull/336
Natalie: CNB lifecycle team inching closer to getting to the newer concept in replacement for "stacks". Questions/concerns?
Sophie: No thoughts about it concretely. No inputs yet
Jan: Node & java have "*" descriptor in buildpacks. UBI has multiple run images for a build image. Real problem might be running into docker layer limit
Ozzy: Only likely to introduce changes/hit issues as runtimes implement the changes. Interested in a presentation of how stacks work in Paketo today, and what's going away with this proposal.
CNB tracking issue: https://github.com/buildpacks/rfcs/issues/219

A

B

Okay, so let's get started thanks everyone for joining again sorry I was late. um Let's start with new faces. I think I recognize everyone here, so we can skip over that and we can get right into the rfcs.

C

B

And I apologize I was not in attendance last week. I was out, so uh you have to bear with me if there's any repeats from discussion.

B

So first up on the rfcs we have the YJ. Oh I forgot to ask for a note taker. Is anyone available to take a few notes? I.

A

Can take notes thank.

B

You Arjun beautiful okay. First up, we have the YJ binary removal from the stacks. um This is Stan's RFC. Are there any updates or comments or questions on this RFC.

B

Looks like the last comment was from forest. Looking for sax maintainers approval to put this in final comment period, so I think that's just on me as a Stax maintainer to respond to.

B

If there's any other questions about this one feel free to chime in now, while we're in the FCP.

B

uh Do couple dependencies from the build packs.

B

Can take a quick look, this is forests RFC and he is not in today scroll down to the bottom and see we still see a lot of open conversation here. I think this just has so much detail. It's going to take a minute to resolve and come into alignment, but are there any ideas here that people want to discuss while we're together or concerns.

A

B

We have Jericho's RFC to publish multi-architecture, build packs how's this going.

D

um I mean I think I was going to try to add some more examples, but um I feel like I. We just need to kind of have a decision from the steering committee at some point on whether you want to move forward or not um because I feel, like the discussion, there's a lot of good discussion in there and I'm not sure we need to add more other than you know. We want to move forward with it and then figure out how you actually want to implement it.

D

So I think it's kind of waiting for that. I did see some kind of change in the ticket like it says one of five tasks done so I, don't really know what's what the status of it of it is right now.

B

All right so you're, looking for just some input from the steering committee to kind of move this forward and yeah. It does kind of look like most of the conversations here have concluded.

B

So I will uh ping the steering committee members after this and have them like take a look at this as soon as they can also the rest of the core development teams, since this will affect everybody, so we can kind of get the ball rolling on this.

B

Are there any changes that you need to make to be RFC based off these conversations, or have you kind of been doing that as you go? I haven't had a chance to re-review this in a couple weeks. No.

D

B

D

Was going to try to create like a full working example, um but I'm not I mean like there is kind of a community example from somebody else who was doing multi-arch, build packs for Java, I. Think uh but I'm not sure it's really important to like necessarily put that in there, um because I think you know, may not be implemented that way anyway. It's just an idea, somebody's already doing this, and we should too so yeah I. Don't know that I need to add anymore I'm, happy to add more.

D

If somebody wants something else, but I feel like everything's fairly well captured in there already.

B

Right that makes sense, I think this is also similarly to the other one, where it's just kind of like a big concept, and nobody wants to just be the one to say yeah. This looks good, let's go ahead and do it, but I think that we're kind of at that point it's been a month uh helping people, and hopefully we can get some movement on that for next week.

D

Cool yeah I was out, I think the last couple meetings, just because I couldn't make it so uh yeah. If you could help get some eyes on this, that would be great yeah.

B

Definitely, okay: we have the bionic end of support RFC here this one has a bunch of of approvals already.

B

I think we can probably merge this in I'll double check, but I think we're good here. Unless anybody has any concerns.

A

Yeah from last week, I think Rob was looking for just an approval from all maintainers.

B

Okay, I'll bump everybody. After this thanks.

B

Okay, those are all of the rfcs we have so we can move on to the next section.

B

uh We have CMB updates and questions I personally, don't have any updates, because I've been on vacation. Are there any other updates people know from the community or things they're wondering about.

A

B

Next, we have project update again, not too sure about these, because I have not been here, but anybody else in the community have anything they want to share.

B

I saw some updates on some of the Ubi related repositories, which is exciting that that's moving forward, but anything else.

B

Okay and then next up, we have open mic questions and discussion topics. So first up we have one um from Michael. He could not make the meeting and oh yeah there. You go number of PRS related to live node.js that need review.

E

Yeah Michael says: uh send his apologies in advance. Caesar I might can't make today's one, but yeah he's um Michael's, looking after the Ubi node.js extension stuff and he's got a bunch load of uh PR's there that are a pending review that are starting to pull things up a bit. So if any of the node.js teams or people who can review those, can have a look at those or can be encouraged to look at those. uh That would be very useful.

E

uh The second Point that he's got there is is more of the bigger discussion point for today, which um we want to know as red hat now.

E

um Who can we work with as far as Stacks, with the pool that we've got there for our base stack towards working towards getting that to actually do everything that it needs to, because um we don't have a contact name for anybody, who's part of the Poquito Stacks team, or anything like that? It's all currently hidden behind a nice little app for keto Stacks um to stop so anyway.

E

We need to, we need to know who's who we can chat with to work on that to at least get somebody to have a look at that, so that we can start moving forwards because we've got all the stuff coming together now I think we'll should be able to put together a Ubi image with the node stuff in it. uh The Java stuff is following close behind, but I've got to rewrite uh pipeline Builder um after we've successfully updated lib CMB to have extension support.

E

So that's going to follow shortly afterwards, but um yeah the code written it does run, but we've got to get the dependency chain in place. Otherwise Poquito can't build it um okay, but yes, so if, if uh does anyone here know who we should be talking to about the stack stuff.

B

You're in look I'm a Stacks maintainer, so um I saw the pr open for the ubi-based deck I just have about 10 000 tabs open with things to look at, but I will definitely take a look at that this week and ASAP and we can work on that together. The other specs maintainers are Rob who's out for a week or two and then Brian so um usually I'll. Just look at the. We have slack groups for everybody if you I've seen you in this login since before so usually I'll.

B

Just look at those different like build pack Stacks or whichever team, to see who's involved. It's just easier than going to the GitHub page.

E

B

Also ping, the node maintainers directly to bump the need for review on the other PRS that you have open.

E

Cool no worries, I'll, let Michael know and he'll probably follow up directly from the stack started stuff.

B

Okay, cool I think we're a little light on node maintainers today, not here.

E

But in general Michael's out today, anyway, I thought it sounds thing so it'll be following up, probably tomorrow and onwards, for the uh the stacks and the the node stops excellent.

B

Okay, cool thanks for the update, alrighty uh I, see another item here: proposal to align, paquetto build pack, logging output.

F

Yeah I thought I'd mention it here. A colleague of mine has opened that it's on the Note JS build pack, so I thought maybe I'd bring it up here, because it's actually related to more than just that, so that might get more attraction. It's like they use different blogging formats, and that gets especially strange if you use the ca certificates, Bill pack as one example from the lip pack side in a note environment where now the it's a single log. So to say that differs in how it's how it's meant.

F

So maybe some people spend a look there. I, don't know if I should propose to my colleague to make this an RFC or if it's enough to have this as an issue, but maybe we start a discussion there, even if that ends in yeah. Please propose that as a as an RSC.

F

So if you're interested just have a look, yes.

B

Yeah, this has been something that we've wanted to do for so long. um The discrepancies between the logging are enormous between the Java non-jobable packs. It's yeah, it's one of those things that we've wanted to do for a long time and it just feels like no one's ever complained about it. But we know it's not great, so it always gets bumped down to the bottom. Would love to see I would love to see an RFC for this. It's one of those things.

B

That's been on my to-do list for a long time, but it's it's a lot and it will probably be kind of a long process if I had to imagine to try and get both sides to kind of converge on a logging standard, but I think it would be worth it, and if this is something that you all are interested in then definitely feel free to proceed with an RFC I.

B

Think in the past, we've wanted to align on our debug logging output, but we've held off because, as a part of that, we need the overall logging like look and structure to match. So.

B

I definitely think um we should maybe I don't know it's good to have this as an example in node.js, but I think we could probably move this to a more central location because it really applies to all of the build packs.

B

Cool, but thanks for the call out on this one, okay I see another item here um related to stack removal. Does anybody want to speak to this item.

C

Yes, hi yeah I added that um I'm Natalie for those I haven't met before um I work on the pnb life cycle and we're slowly slowly, every day, inching closer to releasing the next life cycle um with the next set of apis, which will have the concept of stacks um not really removed, but just uh still there, along with new Concepts, um and this will require some changes for platforms and build packs and I just wanted to kind of check in and see how this group is feeling about those changes and any questions that you all might have.

C

And that kind of thing.

C

I, don't know if anyone's thought that far ahead yet but.

D

All right, Sophie.

B

I was just about to let everybody give a response with where I follow up so you're good.

D

Okay, cool yeah I mean so Natalie I've been working with you, obviously uh and Joe on this and in in the hopes to develop an understanding and then help communicate this to picados. So I, don't really have any questions yet because I think we're still kind of, like you said, making our way towards the end goal, but we're almost there so I feel pretty good about it.

B

Yeah relatedly I haven't physically done much exploration into this, yet so I also don't have any direct questions, but I think we should definitely start thinking about this as a project, since the release will be coming imminently, I'll try the best way, I feel like it's one of those another one of those things that we've been kind of putting off thinking about as a project, but we really need to so I'm kind of wondering what the best way to kind of kick that off on a project wide level would be I mean this is a great start, but maybe something in writing.

B

Maybe I'll send out a message in slack and see if anybody has thoughts, but so far I personally don't have anything I know you were looking for some input from PHP maintainers the other day, but we didn't have anything at that point.

F

I I was about to say I'm, mainly looking at note and Java and I guess: there's not much of a problem. There I guess.

A

F

Of the references to Stacks have been exchanged by a star mentioning in the book packs tomorrow anyway, in the recent time so.

E

Yeah, there's going to be some Fallout in pipeline Builder I know that much and and some fall out around the opposite- the jam tool. That's used to um do some of the builds today because poquito's very tied to at least in the Java parts that I've looked at it's very tied to using that particular tool that generates the Run image and the build image and then ties that together as a concept of a stack so that the next part of the Geo can then consume that and do what it needs to.

E

So when stack goes away at the at the you know, Cloud native, build Pack level. I guess could keep it artificially if it wanted, if it's just the contract that no longer exists into the deliverables, but um as we're looking at the Ubi stuff, where we're going to have multiple Run images for one given Builder image um that that certainly starts to get a lot weaker, a little quicker, so um I think I think there's going to be changes to come. But some of this will only really happen as as you'll hit the problems.

E

When you try to remove it and I. Don't think that's going to happen to people try to go in and actually remove stacks from the relevant different runtimes that exist.

F

Yeah, adding to that, we are very likely to squash together our stacks and build our repositories into one.

F

And there's a one-to-one relationship with the piketto Reapers for that as well right, so it.

E

F

Bit like that could be a move forward.

B

That's an interesting all.

F

Right I mean I've brought that up in the past already like I could even Envision to actually um I know. It doesn't work for the full stuff like to actually make this a like stack. Just a weak notion of this is all based on the Demi package ecosystem.

F

But then, actually you don't necessarily need to distinguish tiny base and follow, because there are multiple Run images you could use. It could even be extensions that choose, depending on the language which one is taken so I, guess what we would run into is the layer limit in terms of we can't just stuff everything into one Builder, because obviously what was it?

F

How many anyway, whatever that was the layer limit of Docker being the actual problem, because you could have just say: hey, Jammy, stack or hme Builder and then have multiple Run images for that um and I guess at least tiny and bass actually share the build image content-wise but like there wouldn't be a necessarily a need for a full build image, because you could use extensions to also just put whatever you need there.

B

We started that discussion anywhere. I know. You said you brought this up in the past I.

F

A

Brought it up in a meeting, so maybe we.

F

Can find something in the document? That's for for notes, nothing, nothing more concrete than that.

B

Right: okay, yeah, let's I'm gonna, look for that and I think I'm gonna file, an issue for us to like I'll, probably just file a very basic top level issue. That says you know: Implement stack removal when it becomes available or something like that and then I will pour over any contacts that I can find in the document, and maybe we can have a discussion there.

E

I mean yeah, but from website it'll be interesting to see another, how much effort it is or whether it's viable. But if, if you could have a presentation on what the kiko does with Stacks today and on the flip side, a presentation of what's going away from the cncf side of it, then we should be able to see what's missing but I. Think at the moment.

E

I'm I'm kind of I can't really comment too much on it, because I've met the different bits in different places, but I don't know how many of those are already in somebody else's to-do list and I. Don't think anybody really has that at the moment, because I don't think anybody's got a to-do list, but removing Stacks in Poquito, so we're gonna kind of have to start by drawing a map. Out of where do we use Stacks today? How do we use them or why would we use them that way?

E

And then you can see where we can get rid of them and where we'll need to introduce a Poquito level on strike, to tie things together as a something like that and it doesn't have to be called stack. Probably shouldn't be called stack. Call it something.

F

Else, there's one interesting, there's one interesting bit outside of the build pack tunnel, where even Java and node ecosystem still have a Reliance on stack. That's uh the conditionals checking for a tiny as an indicator for there's no Bash.

D

Yeah I, so actually, on the multi-arch front, the first thing I did was um try to play with how far along the the stack removal RFC was. You know finished how how far along had I gotten and I that's when we discovered that they're a little bit more work was needed, but I think that it's more, the approach would be more. That Stacks are deprecated and you'll just continue to support them for a long time, um because you can never guarantee what you know: API version somebody's using or whatever.

D

um So if you just keep the stack label in your Docker images, when you create your your uh your stack for lack of a better word, um then you can support forward and backward compatibility like it's really just you start adding new labels and you get the benefits of Both Worlds, but anyways I have a little repo that I created like to test this stuff out um and if you open an issue, I can link to it.

D

um But you know, ironically, the thing I wanted to test was multi-arch build packs, but what I ended up doing was working on multi-arch Builders, because you need them to test all that stuff. So I'm happy to share that work. uh When the issue gets created.

B

That would be excellent.

B

I also liked your idea, Aussie of having some kind of show and tell where we kind of go through how everything works both on the c and b side and how we currently do things in McKenna.

B

Did y'all ever do something like that in the CNB working group meeting Natalie on the CNB side.

C

um Kind of I mean we, we've been giving some demos of like with the pre-releases of pack and the life cycle. You know this is how you create a builder look here: a new fields and Builder pommel. Look: here's new, you know metadata that gets added to a builder um just to kind of showcase. What it is that we're shipping um but I, don't think. We've really documented anywhere the kind of real life usage of either what exists or what will?

C

What will exist, but um I've linked to the uh tracking issue that we're using to like kind of organize um the different work stream on the CNB side. uh uh So you can, you can see the original RFP as well as the spec PRS, and the implementation.

B

Thank you, foreign.

B

Are there any other thoughts on this.

B

Sounds like Natalie in the coming meetings. We will be looking to discuss this more as we get this onto people's radars.

B

Okay, that's the bottom of the agenda. Then. Are there any other comments or questions? People want to bring up.

B

Okay doesn't sound like it thanks. Everyone.

F

Thank you. Bye, bye, see, ya.