Skip to content
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.

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

Switch to GH Containers #9

Open
2 tasks
5HT2 opened this issue Sep 25, 2021 · 11 comments
Open
2 tasks

Switch to GH Containers #9

5HT2 opened this issue Sep 25, 2021 · 11 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested

Comments

@5HT2
Copy link
Member

5HT2 commented Sep 25, 2021

Github has support for storing your Docker images on Github, instead of Docker Hub. The GH Action that we're using currently does not need you to change much to add support for this.

The reasoning behind this is that Docker now only allows 1 personal access token for pushing your containers, and org plans are paid. Given this push to pay for Docker Hub (which enforces poor security practices), it would be better to switch to GH for hosting the images.

  • Switch Action and Makefile
  • Update update.sh script
@5HT2 5HT2 added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 25, 2021
@5HT2
Copy link
Member Author

5HT2 commented Sep 25, 2021

Another alternative is switching away from Docker entirely, to Kubernetes. As long as the user experience is mostly the same, I do not see an issue with this, and it would be preferable given my complaints with docker (excess image size, lots of required steps to solve the former, pushing consumers towards a subscription model).

@5HT2
Copy link
Member Author

5HT2 commented Oct 6, 2021

Honestly, given the amount of issues I've had debugging docker and trying to fix things, and given the fact it isn't a straightforward "run one command and it all works" (the reason I added docker support initially), I feel like going back to a systemd-based system, or another containerization system which is less finicky.

@d1snin
Copy link
Contributor

d1snin commented Nov 4, 2021

It is not a good idea to use GCR, especially because of this issue - https://github.community/t/docker-pull-from-public-github-package-registry-fail-with-no-basic-auth-credentials-error/16358. GitHub will not allow you to even pull public images, but surprisingly you can download an image from their website.

@5HT2
Copy link
Member Author

5HT2 commented Nov 4, 2021

Yes, at present you do need to authenticate to read even publicly available packages.

They allow you to do so, you just need to make a personal access token with permission to download packages.

Docker Hub works the same way. You need to log into docker hub in order to download packages, as far as I know.

Either way, I just need something that can

  • Store containers in OCI format.
  • Allow you to pull them somehow.

I've already done a lot of research on various options, and most would be easier to use than how I'm using Docker now, and would basically be a drop-in replacement.

Technically I could still upload regular containers to Docker Hub, even if they're not "normal" Docker containers (which are also OCI spec, iirc), but then I would need to have a GH Action to build and upload them with a separate config, and have the user-facing config in the repo.

The reasoning behind this is that Docker now only allows 1 personal access token for pushing your containers, and org plans are paid. Given this push to pay for Docker Hub (which enforces poor security practices), it would be better to switch to GH for hosting the images.

This is still an issue, as well, if I use a non-Docker format and upload it to Docker Hub.

@5HT2
Copy link
Member Author

5HT2 commented Nov 4, 2021

I'll likely get around to doing it this weekend, once I streamline the process. If you have any suggestions about what else to use, that would be great.

@d1snin
Copy link
Contributor

d1snin commented Nov 4, 2021

They allow you to do so, you just need to make a personal access token with permission to download packages.

I don't think that it is good for open source projects, its a public image, why should it require an authentication?

@d1snin
Copy link
Contributor

d1snin commented Nov 4, 2021

And docker hub allows you to pull the publically available images without an authentication.

@5HT2
Copy link
Member Author

5HT2 commented Nov 4, 2021

Well I didn't know that Docker Hub allowed it for public images, it always asked me to login.

Either way, I've already stated the issues I have with Docker and Docker Hub, I'd rather find an alternative for hosting the images.

@d1snin
Copy link
Contributor

d1snin commented Nov 4, 2021

Well I didn't know that Docker Hub allowed it for public images, it always asked me to login.

I've done a little research now and docker is really asking about authentication just to pull an image, but I haven't found how to disable it. How, for example, can you access a mongo image without authentication?

@d1snin
Copy link
Contributor

d1snin commented Nov 4, 2021

Well, I guess it is an another issue which is not related to current one.

@5HT2
Copy link
Member Author

5HT2 commented Dec 18, 2022

I'm not sure if I even want to bother providing a pre-built image anywhere tbh, Docker Hub sucks for free users and the alternatives aren't much better. I might just require building from scratch which is.. honestly fine.

@5HT2 5HT2 added the question Further information is requested label Dec 18, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants