-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Provide tarballs for releases #4699
Comments
Would the tarball be created per platform? Or does it include all the platforms in one file |
We already have a We could have just one checksum file though (SHA512?), and one entry per line. So, something like this: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/CHANGELOG-1.15.md#client-binaries
I don't really care much for SHA-512 myself, due to the line wrapping and lack of tools. |
There's some bugs with the current targets, though. It "forgets" to gzip the files, and includes kvm2 driver. So I think we want to have a solution* for the drivers first. And I have no idea why we include the add-ons ? |
Do you mind elaborating on the plans and use case for the tarballs? I'm hesitant to introduce another download form on our release pages unless there is a clear benefit for users:
The tarball addresses the solution of how to download the kvm2 driver, but I'm not sure it otherwise differentiates itself enough to warrant a 3rd form of download, particularly as it would still need a form of installation. For what it's worth, I don't mind the tarball approach: I do in fact prefer it to the current approach of supplying an arbitrary executable (on macOS and Linux). If we adopt the tarball approach, we should discuss what it would take to deprecate the binary download approach. Thoughts? |
Some packaging formats prefer tarballs (in fact only support tar), so it might make it easier downstream. The two benefits were:
Both of these benefits are already in the packages, but since we can't see to settle on one standard...
Note: all of these formats have the exact same But I don't think that we want to remove the executable, since lots of users are using that already. |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
are we still thinking doin this ? I would support any effort to give users a cheap option to download. for places with slow internet. |
The main problem was that we were unable to support more than one primary format. But again the Latest numbers: Kubernetes links, for comparison: |
My original goal was that I wanted to support something like this*: But then I ended up implementing the "minikube kubectl" instead. TL;DR So I guess we can close this now. Ultimately it is much better that the computer handles all this for us... The main problem was that it was hard to get "blessed" by a distribution. It's a bit sad that you need to have root privileges (sudo), just to install a tool. Compare the current:
With: (an imaginary)
In order to provide tarballs, we would have to extend our instructions above.
And note that there is even one step missing from our current instructions.
Not to mention signing, we haven't even gotted around to doing that just yet...
And of course, the instructions above assume that
* See https://docs.0install.net/details/ for a manual walk-through of all steps. The way I see it, the tarballs (archives) were just a small piece of the puzzle. |
In addition to the currently existing binaries, we should provide tarballs for smaller downloads.
Doesn't have to be anything fancy, just add .tar.gz with the same files. Kubernetes does this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: