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

Limit Dockerfile to a specific version ID #19050

Closed
synergiator opened this issue Jan 4, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Limit Dockerfile to a specific version ID #19050

synergiator opened this issue Jan 4, 2016 · 3 comments
Labels
area/builder kind/feature Functionality or other elements that the project doesn't currently have. Features are new and shiny

Comments

@synergiator
Copy link

FEATURE REQUEST

As Dockerfile build instructions are still changing, I miss the possibility to tag somehow the minimal supported version to clearly state minumum requirements on the building system. - as we know it from Maven. (Yes after all the system would spit buckets of ambigous errors, so I thought a more declarative style might be a benefit)

Something like

LANGUAGE_VERSION=1.9

would me in my opinion really helpful!

thanks. :)

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

I think this is a duplicate of an issue I opened a long time ago; #4907.

However, the Dockerfile syntax is currently frozen, so we currently cannot accept changes to the Dockerfile syntax; https://github.com/docker/docker/blob/master/ROADMAP.md#22-dockerfile-syntax

@thaJeztah thaJeztah added the kind/feature Functionality or other elements that the project doesn't currently have. Features are new and shiny label Jan 4, 2016
@MHBauer
Copy link
Contributor

MHBauer commented Jan 5, 2016

I understand maven so I instantly understand what this could do for us. If it were easier to change the builder, and we weren't in a freeze, I think it would help solve a lot of problems that require us to have the freeze. I think having a version that is respected by the builder, it becomes easy to do a clean split of previous functionality to new functionality (Not that a refactor or rewrite of the builder would be easy, this would isolate any effects). This could be a really good first steep to allowing experimentation with builder changes.

@LK4D4
Copy link
Contributor

LK4D4 commented Sep 14, 2016

Closing this issue as inactive in efforts to make issue list cleaner. Feel free to open new proposal.

@LK4D4 LK4D4 closed this as completed Sep 14, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/builder kind/feature Functionality or other elements that the project doesn't currently have. Features are new and shiny
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants