Hacker News Reader

Comment by quaunaut | Hacker News Reader

This seems to be a fairly outdated article, despite the displayed date- it says the 'newest' version is 0.7, but we've been on 0.11 since 2 weeks ago: http://blog.docker.io/2014/05/docker-0-11-release-candidate-...

It's some pretty amazing tech, and I love it with Vagrant for my local dev environment, and for full deploys. I'm not such a big fan of Dokku- it's a great 'heroku replacement' but one of the best strengths of docker, is you can just upload your code to a private repo(or use a trusted build on a private repo!) and pull that down and run to deploy. Dokku going through the buildpack process, while making it nice from a quick git push angle, sacrifices one of Docker's strongest features(consistency).

View on HN

This is a great point and has bugged me for for the past few months - I'm sat there watching my 'npm install' whir by and I'm thinking - 'I reckon this is not the "docker way"'

Having said - I'm still trying to work out the combination of source repo and docker repo - i.e. 1 dev makes a code change - they commit the code to github - they then commit the docker image to the registry.

Now - does developer number 2 'git pull' or 'docker pull'

What I really like is how docker does not really enforce anything upon you - leaving the above question to be answered any which way.

Docker ftw!

I don't think sharing the image is necessary during development. I just add the Dockerfile to the repository and each dev builds their own image. If they are methodical they can pull the repo and rebuild the image at the beginning of their work day. Most times it will be rebuilt in a second because there have been no changes. If they don't rebuild the image, it will be the main suspect as soon as something breaks anyway, so I can't see this causing much trouble.

This is exactly what I do, just using Trusted Builds.

Right now one of my biggest curiosities, is doing mass deploys and unified logs. I've not tried to so it hasn't mattered yet, but it could be fun.

Personally, I git pull and I just have all the important repos [e.g. things with Dockerfiles that people want to be notified if they should rebuild] dump to chatroom notifications so people know they might want to rebuild.

quaunaut: I've never used Dokku so I'm not sure if this is helpful, but I've been experimenting with using https://github.com/progrium/buildstep to build containers using buildpacks. I'm finding that it allows for fast builds and a consistent image that I can push/pull to different environments. There is a PR (https://github.com/progrium/buildstep/pull/50) for adding buildpack caching that makes the builds even faster by caching gems and assets (I happen to be using it for a rails project).

Just a sidenote, but why do some software projects consider 0.11 higher than 0.7? I remember when jQuery did this it broke tons of plugins that used a simple numerical comparison to see if the version was high enough (which seems sensible enough to me).

Because 11 is higher than 7. It's not version 0.1.1 or version "dot one one", it's version "dot eleven". Eleven is a bigger number than seven is.

it's true, 11 > 7 but 0.11 < 0.7

Version numbers are not always decimal numbers.

0.11 is higher than 0.7 because version numbers aren't decimal numbers. The 0 is the "major" version number and the 11 or 7 is the "minor" version number. Many projects follow the Semantic Versioning convention.

http://semver.org/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com