Owen-CH-Leung commented on code in PR #830:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka-site/pull/830#discussion_r3031537729
##########
Makefile:
##########
@@ -1,11 +1,12 @@
# Hugo configuration
OUTPUT_DIR := output
-HUGO_BASE_IMAGE := hvishwanath/hugo:v0.123.7-ext-multiplatform
+HUGO_VERSION := 0.123.7
+HUGO_BASE_IMAGE :=
ghcr.io/apache/kafka-site/hugo:v$(HUGO_VERSION)-ext-multiplatform
DOCKER_IMAGE := $(HUGO_BASE_IMAGE)
#PROD_IMAGE := hvishwanath/kafka-site-md:1.2.0
PROD_IMAGE :=
us-west1-docker.pkg.dev/play-394201/kafka-site-md/kafka-site-md:1.6.0
Review Comment:
This was pre-existing in markdown HEAD and not introduced by this PR. I
wanted to flag it and ask for your comment before touching it.
`PROD_IMAGE` points to a personal GCP Artifact Registry
(us-west1-docker.pkg.dev/play-394201/...) and is used by the `prod-image` and
`prod-run` Makefile targets to build and push a production nginx image (via
`Dockerfile.prod`) for local testing.
However, looking at the actual CI pipeline, the site is served via static
files committed to `asf-staging`/`asf-site` branches — no Docker prod image is
involved in actual deployment.
There is also a `ghcr-prod-image` target that pushes to GHCR, but it's
equally unused in CI.
My question: should we clean up `PROD_IMAGE`, `prod-image`, `prod-run`, and
`ghcr-prod-image` entirely (along with Dockerfile.prod) since they don't appear
to be part of the actual deployment pipeline? Or is there a use case we're
missing where a containerised prod image is needed?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
