[pkg-go] Plans to update the docker package

[Stephen Gelman]

Arnaud,

In my experience the most helpful resource when building go packages
has been #debian-golang on irc.debian.org.  I’d recommend hopping in
there with questions.  I’ll make an effort to be in there as much as
possible to help where I can.

Stephen

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:44 AM, Arnaud <arnaud.rebillout at collabora.com> wrote:
> Dear Docker Packaging Team,
>
> I'm working at Collabora, and right now I have a bit of time to dedicate
> to the Docker Debian package. I would like to bump Docker to the latest
> version in Debian unstable.
>
> Up to now I've been struggling a bit to get the big picture, and I think
> I'm getting there.
>
> From what I understood from the latest `vendor.conf` file, Docker now
> uses runc and containerd from upstream. Moreover, I cooked a little
> script to compare the vendored libraries with their upstream version,
> and amazingly it looks like Docker doesn't patch any of its vendored
> libraries at the moment. Same goes with containerd.
>
> It seems that it was not so simple in the past, and that's why there is
> now a 'docker-runc' and a 'docker-containerd' package. But in this mail
> I won't talk about these packages, I'm interested in the 'runc' and
> 'containerd' packages which track the upstream repositories, not the
> docker forks.
>
> So what I want to do in a first step is to bump the 'runc' and
> 'containerd' package to the latest version. It seems that the 'runc'
> package is already up-to-date (1.0.0-rc4). However the 'containerd'
> package is still at '0.2.3', while upstream is at '1.0.2-rc1'.
>
> I looked at the situation, and there's a bit of work involved: a little
> less than 20 packages need to be created or bumped to a newer version. I
> already created 4 packages that I submitted through ITP and that are now
> available on salsa.debian.org.
>
> So in the following days and weeks, I will hopefully dedicate some time
> to package containerd dependencies, until I manage to get containerd
> itself packaged and up to date. Then I will attempt the same with the
> docker package. At least, that's the plan :)
>
> Tell me if I miss anything !
>
> Additionally, I noticed that since mid-2017, Docker changed the way it
> manages its codebase. There's now 3 repo:
>
> - https://github.com/moby/moby for the engine
> - https://github.com/docker/cli for the client
> - https://github.com/docker/docker-ce which is a kind of
> "meta-repository" that contains both repositories above, plus packaging
> files.
>
> The tricky thing is that the engine and the client don't get tagged
> anymore, only docker-ce has tags and releases.
>
> I don't know if some of you already dived into this. It seems to me that
> it could be easier to have two packages: docker-engine that would track
> moby/moby, and docker-cli that would track docker/cli. Then a
> metapackage 'docker' that would depend on both, and ensure the versions
> match.
>
> On the other hand I'm quite new at Debian packaging, so I wouldn't trust
> myself :)
>
> What's your thoughts on that ? Any comment is welcome.
>
> Best regards,
>
>   Arnaud
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
> Pkg-go-maintainers at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers