Remove Windows Containers support #311
Conversation
|
Maintainers, As you review this RFC please queue up issues to be created using the following commands: Issues(none) |
Remove support for Windows Containers in CNB tooling and documentation, but retain support in the Buildpacks spec. Signed-off-by: Aidan Delaney <adelaney21@bloomberg.net>
AidanDelaney
force-pushed
the
feat/remove-windows-containers-suppport
branch
from
832d82e to
ff8c235
Compare
AidanDelaney
changed the title
| - There are no known users of Windows Container support within the buildpacks ecosystem. | ||
| - Supporting Windows Containers is straightforward at a specification level. However, the CNB project has neither the time nor the expertise to continue to support Windows Containers in our tooling. | ||
| - Removing Windows Container support from CNB tooling will speed up development, simplify testing and impact no existing users. | ||
| - Establish platform parity between `pack` and `kpack`. `kpack` has never supported building Windows Containers. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
kpack actually does support building windows containers (buildpacks-community/kpack#546), albeit in a slightly more limited capacity. There is an open discussion on the kpack side to remove windows support (buildpacks-community/kpack#1366)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks. I see it's difficult to get community feedback on this as, I suspect, there are no kpack users who build Windows containers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@AidanDelaney can we update the statement in the RFC to reflect Tom's comment?
| # What it is | ||
| [what-it-is]: #what-it-is | ||
|
|
||
| - We want to remove Windows Containers related documentation, but clearly state that the specification is platform neutral. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How hard will it be to make a platform neutral specification format, i.e. POSIX vs. windows?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We're hoping to maintain the status-quo in the specification where we currently state things like
- "MUST NOT be run for Windows builds" (https://github.com/buildpacks/spec/blob/main/buildpack.md#purpose-2)
- "...with the OS path list separator (e.g. : on Linux, ; on Windows)." (https://github.com/buildpacks/spec/blob/main/buildpack.md#targets)
- "For Windows-based images..." (https://github.com/buildpacks/spec/blob/main/buildpack.md#targets-1)
It will be difficult to keep in mind the POSIX/Windows differences when changing the specification. However, I suspect this will be no-more difficult than currently as we have no known Windows containers users.
|
|
||
| Windows Containers support is well tested within `pack`. Removing support for Windows Containers removes a unique selling point of the `pack` CLI and `lifecycle` | ||
|
|
||
| # Alternatives |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This came up in the WG today. Would we want to tie this to a spec change and just remove it all together from the spec?
Ref: buildpacks/rfcs#311 We don't want to block lifecycle releases on pack windows failure anymore. They are unstable and not something we are staffed to invest time into. Signed-off-by: Jesse Brown <jabrown85@gmail.com>
Ref: buildpacks/rfcs#311 We don't want to block lifecycle releases on pack windows failure anymore. They are unstable and not something we are staffed to invest time into. Signed-off-by: Jesse Brown <jabrown85@gmail.com>
|
Given https://medium.com/buildpacks/deprecation-announcement-windows-container-feature-in-cloud-native-buildpacks-bbb70351343d should this PR be moved out of draft status and merged? :-) |
|
@AidanDelaney care to undraft this and update anything that you think needs updating? Then we can get it merged. |
We don't yet have consensus on this. But I'm happy with the approach where the Spec retains Windows support but we drop Windows support from our implementations. |
I took a swing at removing any and all references to windows in this reference implementation. Lifecycle no longer outputs a windows binary as a release artifact Lifecycle no longer operates against windows containers buildpacks/rfcs#311 https://medium.com/buildpacks/deprecation-announcement-windows-container-feature-in-cloud-native-buildpacks-bbb70351343d Signed-off-by: Jesse Brown <jabrown85@gmail.com>
AidanDelaney
changed the title
|
|
||
| - We want to remove Windows Containers related documentation, but clearly state that the specification is platform neutral. | ||
| - Remove Windows Containers support from `pack`, but retain the Windows platform release of the `pack` CLI. | ||
| * this ensures `pack` users can still invoke `pack` on a Command or Power Shell console |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On Windows, pack users will be able to invoke pack on a command or power shell and use Linux containers on Windows, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes - pack will continue to work against Docker Desktop (linux), podman or whatever linux container systems are docker-api compatible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we add it that to the RFC?
|
|
||
| Teams that require Windows Container support will have to | ||
|
|
||
| * continue to use the last release of `pack` that supports Windows Containers, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have a question here: When not using the creator, pack tries to download the latest lifecycle and then calculate the API version supported.
This is an screen-shoot from lifecycle dockerhub
Once lifecycle stops supporting Windows, we will not have an image for windows/amd64, let's suppose this happens on lifecycle >= 0.21.x version. On the other hand, we will keep releasing pack binaries for windows.
When a pack user on Windows runs a build I think we will need to handle the cases where the lifecycle image for windows/amd64 is not available and print a warning message instead of a error which I think is gonna be the case.
jjbustamante
left a comment
jjbustamante
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me, I left a few comments that I think we should consider if we want to add some notes.
Remove support for Windows Containers in CNB tooling and documentation, but retain support in the Buildpacks spec.
readable