On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Jim Henderson
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 13:01:42 -0300, Claudio Freire wrote:
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Jim Henderson
wrote: On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:19:30 -0300, Claudio Freire wrote:
Yes, but call the pattern "container minimal". Calling it "server" makes it seem like it's for a... you know... server. Which elicits thoughts of a physical machine in my language.
It doesn't in mine. Certainly, I have had occasion to create virtual servers where having YaST also was something that wasn't necessary because it was purpose-built for a specific purpose.
When using virtualization orchestration technologies (for example), a really, really minimal image is essential to being able to (for example) move a VM from one host to another when doing load balancing of compute resources.
Alright. But, VMs still require kernels, and that's the critical distinction I was trying to make.
Containers don't.
In essence, a container is a special case of environment that would be wrong to conflate with the case of full machines, either physical or virtual. Usually, a system can ignore the presence of a hypervisor, but a container cannot ignore the host it runs on. In fact, I would bet it's very tricky getting an openSUSE "minimal server" running in a CentOS docker.
So separate patterns seem make sense IMO.
I don't entirely disagree with that assessment.
But there is a point where having lots of different patterns would create more confusion (not to mention maintenance).
Maybe a better approach is needed - layered patterns or something like that.
AFAIK patterns can require patterns, so it would be possible to factor out the common parts of both minimal variants into a minimal base pattern. But I do see the potential confusion lots of patterns would create. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org