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

Github workflow to build container images #16

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ressu
Copy link

@ressu ressu commented Jul 17, 2021

While it's a good idea to build containers manually, it adds additional overhead to anyone who is maintaining the exporter in a container environment. GitHub has actions and Container Registry, so maintaining a prebuilt container is no longer an overhead.

This workflow builds the container and uploads to GHCR when ever a new release is made and when a push to main or dev happens. Latter ones are useful for development flows, while the release flows will push a latest tag in addition to the release tag versions, which allows easy access to old versions as well as current versions.

Automatically build a container image on release and create development
images for master and dev branches.
@mbugert
Copy link
Owner

mbugert commented Jul 18, 2021

Thanks, I appreciate the suggested changes.
I agree that the current docker image strategy could be made more convenient. The ugliness mainly comes from the yaml config file which could be replaced entirely by envvars. Once that is done, self-contained docker images could be built and shipped to users. Until then, I would want to keep this PR open.

Unfortunately, it can take quite a while (weeks/months, tbd) until I have the time to make these changes (several work-related commitments), so I hope you don't hate me for not merging it in right away. 😜

@ressu
Copy link
Author

ressu commented Jul 18, 2021

Based on the discussion in #15 (comment). Would you be open to changing the configuration to use targets from scrape config? That could allow removing the configuration completely and providing all information runtime

@mbugert
Copy link
Owner

mbugert commented Jul 18, 2021

Yep, I would prefer reading targets from the prometheus config! 😄 But I expect it to be quite a significant implementation effort.

@ressu
Copy link
Author

ressu commented Jul 18, 2021

Cool, let me see what I can do.. I'm mostly scratching my own itch, so I might be able to refactor things appropriately. Lets keep the other PR on hold until then too.

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 this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants