Skip to content
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

Move to UBI based container images for Scylla Manager containers #4242

Open
Tracked by #2347
ylebi opened this issue Feb 6, 2025 · 6 comments · Fixed by #4244
Open
Tracked by #2347

Move to UBI based container images for Scylla Manager containers #4242

ylebi opened this issue Feb 6, 2025 · 6 comments · Fixed by #4244
Assignees

Comments

@ylebi
Copy link

ylebi commented Feb 6, 2025

To achieve OpenShift certification for the Scylla-Operator, our Scylla Manager container images need to be based on Red Hat's UBI images.

cc: @mykaul @mflendrich

@Michal-Leszczynski
Copy link
Collaborator

cc: @yaronkaikov

yaronkaikov added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 6, 2025
To achieve OpenShift certification for the Scylla-Operator, our Scylla Manager container images need to be based on Red Hat's UBI images.

Fixes: #4242
@yaronkaikov yaronkaikov self-assigned this Feb 6, 2025
@mflendrich
Copy link

The scope of this issue is that the Scylla Manager container passes all the criteria in sections 2.1 (image content requirements) and 2.2 (image policy requirements) the certification policy guide.

In human terms, this means:

@yaronkaikov
Copy link
Collaborator

I see, so in that case, I will not deal with it now. will schedule to one of our next sprints

@mflendrich
Copy link

I think this shouldn't be closed yet, because the dockerfile after #4244 is still missing some stuff required for certification (at least the labels).

cc @karol-kokoszka @Michal-Leszczynski @yaronkaikov

@avikivity
Copy link
Member

Need to check if there are any restrictions on those UBI things.

@avikivity
Copy link
Member

The FAQ says:

Access to UBI-based packages?

Yes; redistributable and not subject to Red Hat Enterprise Agreement

Access to non-UBI packages?

Yes, but non-UBI packages subject to Red Hat Enterprise Agreement

So it looks okay.

@yaronkaikov yaronkaikov reopened this Feb 13, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants