Update the runtime image with the commit: 8bda2fa on main #65
Conversation
atheo89
force-pushed
the
fixes-on-runtimes
branch
from
649ab26
to
5e7c9fd
Compare
|
@atheo89: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
modh is probably another new organisation in quay.io for me. Do we have it documented somewhere which quay orgs serves to what? 🙃
Also, links to opendatahub/workbench-images:runtime* in these Dockerfiles are okay? Namely the values of io.openshift.build.image, io.openshift.build.source-location and authoritative-source-url
- https://github.com/red-hat-data-services/notebooks/blob/main/runtimes/datascience/ubi8-python-3.8/Dockerfile
- https://github.com/red-hat-data-services/notebooks/blob/main/runtimes/datascience/ubi9-python-3.9/Dockerfile
- https://github.com/red-hat-data-services/notebooks/blob/main/runtimes/minimal/ubi8-python-3.8/Dockerfile
- https://github.com/red-hat-data-services/notebooks/blob/main/runtimes/minimal/ubi9-python-3.9/Dockerfile
- https://github.com/red-hat-data-services/notebooks/blob/main/runtimes/pytorch/ubi8-python-3.8/Dockerfile
- https://github.com/red-hat-data-services/notebooks/blob/main/runtimes/pytorch/ubi9-python-3.9/Dockerfile
- https://github.com/red-hat-data-services/notebooks/blob/main/runtimes/tensorflow/ubi8-python-3.8/Dockerfile
- https://github.com/red-hat-data-services/notebooks/blob/main/runtimes/tensorflow/ubi9-python-3.9/Dockerfile
Regarding the Tensorflow - I don't like that the naming here doesn't match convention with the others - the runtime keyword isn't first. Is it possible to change this paradigm?
Doesn't need to be addressed in this PR, we can create an issue for that to track it if we agree.
| @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ | |||
| "metadata": { | |||
| "tags": [], | |||
| "display_name": "Python 3.8 (UBI8)", | |||
| "image_name": "quay.io/opendatahub/workbench-images:runtime-minimal-ubi8-python-3.8-6a6098d" | |||
| "image_name": "quay.io/modh/runtime-images@sha256:a3ee8b8eff99e9699fba1c1a51a9eedc4499caceeb4106e708da048ea0c30ef3" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This Anaconda image points to the minimal one - is this on purpose?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes this is intentional
these are runtime image, directly doesn't have conda in them
they would be used by elyra pipeline, if someone executes them.
Documenting about the images, yes we need to do it about the Dockerfiles labels. we should improve those as well. Naming convention, i wouldn't change it anymore, as it is only on dev side, and users would see display name. |
well, I was about to create an issue for that but I'm not sure whether we shall create it in upstream 🤔
okay 🙃 |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: harshad16 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Update the runtime image with the commit: 8bda2fa on main