Moving the repo to the elixir-lang org means the core team must take on the burden ensuring the project is maintained until EOL, as well as fielding all issues and support requests that come with a loaded bag such as deployment solutions, so this is not something I see happening. It’s great that the author made this available for folks that need it!

BTW it turns out that there are three patterns of “official docker images”

• A. Official docker namespace, docker-library github repo
  • Python: _/python from GitHub - docker-library/python: Docker Official Image packaging for Python · GitHub
• B. Official docker namespace, own git repo
  • Sentry: _/sentry from GitHub - getsentry/docker-sentry: Docker Official Image packaging for Sentry · GitHub
• C. Own docker namespace, own git repo
  • Jenkins: jenkins/jenkins from GitHub - jenkinsci/docker: Docker official jenkins repo · GitHub

I just asked the maintainer about what’s the common or prefeered way: see move github repo under elixir-lang · Issue #64 · c0b/docker-elixir · GitHub

Moving the repo to the elixir-lang org means the core team must take on the burden ensuring the project is maintained until EOL, as well as fielding all issues and support requests that come with a loaded bag such as deployment solutions, so this is not something I see happening. It’s great that the author made this available for folks that need it!

I totally understand the concern, but I don’t think it’s like introducing another standard library (e.g. HTTP library). The “official” Docker image is pretty minimal - it’s basically installing erlang and elixir. Anyway it does not need to be maintained by elixir core team - so let’s wait for feedback from the docker image maintainer.