Makefile: Drop unused CONTAINER_RUNTIME

[cgwalters]

This variable is dead code as far as I can tell. I think it got cargo culted from something similar in skopeo, where it is used:
https://github.com/containers/skopeo/blob/85598438ce295fc9acdc27a1d5f97b7501f411a5/Makefile#L75 etc.

(Instead it looks like there's a PODMANCMD here)

But I'm effectively using this PR as a way to suggest aligning with what we're doing in bootc, where we have a core principle that Makefile should never itself spawn containers (or VMs etc). All the rules in Makefile are things that should work when e.g. building RPMs or debs or the like.

Those tasks are things that are done via Justfile: https://github.com/bootc-dev/bootc/blob/main/Justfile

So for example to align, we'd add a Justfile here and then make validatepr would move to just validatepr.

None

[cgwalters]

Also xref bootc-dev/bootc#1719

[afbjorklund]

Seems to have been there since the beginning, to avoid the D-word and the swear jar: 9250747

[baude]

hello @cgwalters mind rebasing and seeing you can pickup a recent merge from @Honny1 which should fix the wild card registry failures?

[mheon]

LGTM
/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cgwalters, mheon

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 [mheon]

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

[cgwalters]

hello @cgwalters mind rebasing and seeing you can pickup a recent merge from @Honny1 which should fix the wild card registry failures?

Sure done though this utterly trivial PR was more a vehicle to discuss synchronizing the development pattern more and I'm interested in comments on that

[mheon]

I really like some of our containerized tasks that run from the Makefile. vendor-in-container and validatepr guarantee that your vendor and/or lint jobs run the exact way they will in our CI - no version skew issues, your output is CI's output. These aren't things you're ever likely to do when building packages, but provide substantial utility to new contributors who want to figure out why exactly they're not able to pass CI. Adding additional complexity by moving them out of Makefile is, IMO, going to risk driving folks away - and it's already hard enough to contribute to Podman that that is a real problem.

[cgwalters]

Of course, we 100% share the goal that it should be easy to contribute and easy to reproduce CI locally.

The first step here that would not break anything would be to add a Justfile that would just run those existing make tasks as is.

But new things that have side effects outside the build tree (per the principle) would go in Justfile, not Makefile for example.

[baude]

/lgtm

[Luap99]

The first step here that would not break anything would be to add a Justfile that would just run those existing make tasks as is.

I have no interest in that personally. Adding two different "build" systems just seems way more confusing an requires unnecessary dependencies for devs who then need both and then also need to remember which target is in which file and duplicating them seems just a waste of effort.