-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 61
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
Thinking about Crane 2 #195
Comments
Hello @michaelsauter I just wanted to check that you are not planning on removing the |
@dreamcat4 Of course not, |
Right now I'm not using the build functionality because, as you said, it's too limited. The ability to specify a command as an alternative to a Dockerfile would go a long way in my case. |
maybe in V2, can consider use golang docker client, e.g. https://github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient, so that we can get rid of the dependency of docker bin. |
@missedone Actually I like that crane calls the docker bin... because it means the I'm not strictly opposed to having both, so long as that feature ^^ remains intact. But also: To help justify the reasoning, what is the specific (real world) problem(s) you are trying to solve? AFAICT almost all people will also have the docker binary too because certain commands are not being offered by crane, they are provided by docker bin instead. The two tools are supposed to be used in tandem (at least the typical cases, development environment). |
@dreamcat4 no particular tech problem i have. |
@missedone @dreamcat4 That change won't happen. I started out using the Docker binary because it was easier, and also because it was easier to add support for new features (since we don't need to wait for the Go client to be updated). Initially I wanted to change to the Go client, but there's no real need, plus verbose output of Crane is really really nice IMHO. For what's to come in version 2, please see #208. |
FWIW: I'm using the build/provision feature on a daily basis would be happy to see it stay. Although I agree it wouldn't be too tough to script, it is one of the reasons I picked crane over compose/maestro. |
@jesper Good to hear. I have since decided that I don't have the capacity to support another tool besides Crane. Therefore, I'm going to leave the basic support for building/pushing in. |
Progress at #212. |
Recently I have been thinking about what a version 2 of Crane could be. Parts of this has already been covered in #186, but I would like to collect more thoughts here - and hopefully get some feedback!
What I don't like about Crane currently:
lift
- I can't think of a use case where you wouldn't want to pass-r
to itPossible changes:
provision
andpush
commandslift
to pull//remove/runa+b
to target botha
andb
. One could also see affected containers as some sort of "dynamic group", which might be nice to specify as a target as opposed to via flags, e.g.a+linked
or if we want to use a different char,a&linked
. To exclude targets, something likea^b
could work.Any feedback welcome.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: