An Official Varnish Docker Repository

[Federico Schwindt]

Hi Eric,

It's good to finally see a docker image from the community! That said,
personally if the image is official I'd expect it to be done by the people
running the project.
Call me paranoid but I'd feel more reassured knowing it's coming from the
same source. OTOH, I don't see any issues having a non-official image for
anyone to use.

Regarding the Dockerfile itself, as you are aware since Varnish 4.0 you
don't need the sources to build VMODs.
If a VMOD still requires the sources it extremely likely it won't build
with 4.0 and having the sources won't change that.

BR.

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Lewis, Eric <eric.lewis at nytimes.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> we recently open sourced our Varnish Dockerfile
> <https://github.com/newsdev/docker-varnish>, and would like to make it
> the basis for the official Docker repository for Varnish. We've already
> made a proposal
> <https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/1294>, but it was
> suggested we check in with the Varnish project owner's first.
>
> Preferably official Docker repos are maintained by "upstream," i.e.
> someone from the Varnish project. Here's more on Official Docker repos
> <https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/official_repos/>.
>
> Would anyone from the Varnish project be interested in maintaining the
> repository? If not, do you mind if we continue with this effort?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric Lewis
> Web Developer, Interactive News
> The New York Times
> 620 Eighth Avenue, 2nd Floor
> New York, NY 10018
> Office: (212) 556-2081
> Cell: (610) 715-8560
>
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-dev mailing list
> varnish-dev at varnish-cache.org
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-dev/attachments/20160106/63b03e77/attachment.html>