8000 Deprecate Kaniko Tasks by lannuttia · Pull Request #1337 · tektoncd/catalog · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Deprecate Ka 8000 niko Tasks #1337

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 1, 2025
Merged

Deprecate Kaniko Tasks #1337

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 1, 2025

Conversation

lannuttia
Copy link
Contributor

Changes

On June 3rd, 2025 the Kaniko project was archived. Due to the project being archived, I think it is a good idea to deprecate these tasks.

Submitter Checklist

These are the criteria that every PR should meet, please check them off as you
review them:

  • Follows the authoring recommendations
  • Includes docs (if user facing)
  • Includes tests (for new tasks or changed functionality)
  • Meets the Tekton contributor standards (including functionality, content, code)
  • Commit messages follow commit message best practices
  • Has a kind label. You can add one by adding a comment on this PR that
    contains /kind <type>. Valid types are bug, cleanup, design, documentation,
    feature, flake, misc, question, tep
  • Complies with Catalog Organization TEP, see example. Note An issue has been filed to automate this validation

    • File path follows <kind>/<name>/<version>/name.yaml

    • Has README.md at <kind>/<name>/<version>/README.md

    • Has mandatory metadata.labels - app.kubernetes.io/version the same as the <version> of the resource

    • Has mandatory metadata.annotations tekton.dev/pipelines.minVersion

    • mandatory spec.description follows the convention

        ```

  spec:
    description: >-
      one line summary of the resource

      Paragraph(s) to describe the resource.
  ```

See the contribution guide for more details.

@lannuttia
deprecate kaniko tasks
8942765 
On June 3rd, 2025 the Kaniko project was archived. Due to the
project being archived, I think it is a good idea to deprecate
these tasks.
@tekton-robot
Copy link

Hi @lannuttia. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a tektoncd member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jun 21, 2025
@lannuttia
Copy link
Contributor Author

/kind misc

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the kind/misc Categorizes issue or PR as a miscellaneuous one. label Jun 21, 2025
@tekton-robot
Copy link
8000
Catlin Output 
FILE: task/kaniko/0.1/kaniko.yaml
HINT : Task: tekton.dev/v1beta1 - name: "kaniko" is missing a readable display name annotation("tekton.dev/displayName")
WARN : Step "build-and-push" uses image "$(params.BUILDER_IMAGE)" that contains variables; skipping validation
WARN : Step "digest-to-results" uses image "docker.io/stedolan/jq@sha256:a61ed0bca213081b64be94c5e1b402ea58bc549f457c2682a86704dd55231e09"; consider using a image tagged with specific version along with digest eg. abc.io/img:v1@sha256:abcde
FILE: task/kaniko/0.2/kaniko.yaml
HINT : Task: tekton.dev/v1beta1 - name: "kaniko" is missing a readable display name annotation("tekton.dev/displayName")
WARN : Step "build-and-push" uses image "$(params.BUILDER_IMAGE)" that contains variables; skipping validation
WARN : Step "digest-to-results" uses image "docker.io/stedolan/jq@sha256:a61ed0bca213081b64be94c5e1b402ea58bc549f457c2682a86704dd55231e09"; consider using a image tagged with specific version along with digest eg. abc.io/img:v1@sha256:abcde
FILE: task/kaniko/0.3/kaniko.yaml
HINT : Task: tekton.dev/v1beta1 - name: "kaniko" is missing a readable display name annotation("tekton.dev/displayName")
WARN : Step "build-and-push" uses image "$(params.BUILDER_IMAGE)" that contains variables; skipping validation
WARN : Step "digest-to-results" uses image "docker.io/stedolan/jq@sha256:a61ed0bca213081b64be94c5e1b402ea58bc549f457c2682a86704dd55231e09"; consider using a image tagged with specific version along with digest eg. abc.io/img:v1@sha256:abcde
FILE: task/kaniko/0.4/kaniko.yaml
WARN : Step "build-and-push" uses image "$(params.BUILDER_IMAGE)" that contains variables; skipping validation
WARN : Step "digest-to-results" uses image "$(params.JQ_IMAGE)" that contains variables; skipping validation
FILE: task/kaniko/0.5/kaniko.yaml
WARN : Step "build-and-push" uses image "$(params.BUILDER_IMAGE)" that contains variables; skipping validation
FILE: task/kaniko/0.6/kaniko.yaml
WARN : Step "build-and-push" uses image "$(params.BUILDER_IMAGE)" that contains variables; skipping validation
FILE: task/kaniko/0.7/kaniko.yaml

vdemeester
vdemeester approved these changes Jun 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member
@vdemeester vdemeester left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Make sense.
cc @vinamra28 @afrittoli

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jun 24, 2025
@kfox1111
Copy link

With chainguard starting to maintain it, does it still make sense to deprecate?

@vdemeester
Copy link
Member

@kfox1111 to be honest, I think it still does. Chainguard is going to do very small work on it, so we should still consider it deprecated (they won't even produced release artifacts even, … so we would need to build images ourselves, …).

Chainguard is going to keep this fork updated, patched, and maintained. We do not plan any major feature work, but bug fixes and other minor contributions are welcome! We don't plan on publishing built release artifacts (container images, etc.) publicly, but they are available to Chainguard customers. You're welcome to build these yourself from this repository if you are not a Chainguard customer. If a community-supported fork emerges, we'll happily shut this one down and migrate to that. If you're interested in helping there, also reach out!

@kfox1111
Copy link

@vdemeester I think its maybe a bit too early to tell...

Kaniko has been unsupported for a while. The archival just made people realize it.That has caused some new people to step up and start maintaining it. So for now, its better supported then it has been for a while. And that same wake up call may produce even more maintainers, not just chainguard, and that may lead to progress on kaniko again beyond where it is today.

So for now, I dont think much has changed with Kaniko other then its better supported then what it was. And there is hope for more. So why not wait and see for a few months, leaving code that already works and still will work in place for a bit wont hurt, and maybe it all works out. And if it doesn't, remove the tasks, just a little later.

For now, I've still not found a viable kaniko replacement on some of my own clusters. I'm sure there are others in the same boat.

@vinamra28
Copy link
Member

I agree with @vdemeester here. We should deprecate the current versions of the task as the original repository has been archived. Once we get an official and stable release of kaniko which is shipped by Chainguard, we can have a new version of the task which consists of the image supplied by Chainguard.

vinamra28
vinamra28 approved these changes Jun 30, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member
@vinamra28 vinamra28 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/ok-to-test

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Jun 30, 2025
@tekton-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: vdemeester, vinamra28

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:
  • OWNERS [vdemeester,vinamra28]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@vdemeester
Copy link
Member

@vdemeester I think its maybe a bit too early to tell...

Kaniko has been unsupported for a while. The archival just made people realize it.That has caused some new people to step up and start maintaining it. So for now, its better supported then it has been for a while. And that same wake up call may produce even more maintainers, not just chainguard, and that may lead to progress on kaniko again beyond where it is today.

So for now, I dont think much has changed with Kaniko other then its better supported then what it was. And there is hope for more. So why not wait and see for a few months, leaving code that already works and still will work in place for a bit wont hurt, and maybe it all works out. And if it doesn't, remove the tasks, just a little later.

For now, I've still not found a viable kaniko replacement on some of my own clusters. I'm sure there are others in the same boat.

You make some good point. I also think it's ok for us to deprecate for now (we probably should have done it earlier), it doesn't prevent us to re-publish new versions when we feel kaniko is picking up. For now, it's less project to worry about in here.

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 1, 2025
@tekton-robot tekton-robot merged commit a90a6e9 into tektoncd:main Jul 1, 2025
5 of 6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@vdemeester vdemeester vdemeester approved these changes

@vinamra28 vinamra28 vinamra28 approved these changes

Assignees

@vdemeester vdemeester

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. kind/misc Categorizes issue or PR as a miscellaneuous one. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@lannuttia @tekton-robot @kfox1111 @vdemeester @vinamra28
0