Should we keep the not-production-ready disclaimer?

[pnicolli]

I see that we have a disclaimer at the beginning of the readme that states that this image is not viable for production.
Is this still a thing?

I've started using this in production both with simple docker-compose and full-fledged kubernetes and it's working. It's a rather fresh deployment so only time will tell, but so far I'm happy with the result. Of course it needed some proper configuration, but I'm actively using this image and only defining env vars and, in a single scenario, a custom entrypoint just to add an automatic postgres waiting script at the startup.

I mean, there's room for improvement for sure, but I am afraid that adoption will be slowed down by such a statement.

Do you see any blocker in using this for production?
If yes, I'd be happy to hear that, since that would mean I could have something to deal with that I did not think about 😬
If not, I would suggest removing the statement.

Any thoughts?

[avoinea]

The idea was not to encourage people to use this image directly in production with the ADDONS environment variable and all the other env variables that trigger re-build within Docker container.

Your production Docker image should always be in a stable/immutable state, non-dependent on pypi (or any other repo) being up-and-running.

[avoinea]

Anyway, I agree that we can remove the warning from the front-end README as Sven took care and added it everywhere else where it is relevant 😄

• https://docs.plone.org/manage/docker/docs/index.html#introduction
• https://docs.plone.org/manage/docker/docs/usage/addons.html#theme-development
• https://docs.plone.org/manage/docker/docs/usage/basic.html#basic-usage