Draft: 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.
| # 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>
Remove support for Windows Containers in CNB tooling and documentation, but retain support in the Buildpacks spec.
readable