Redeploy breaks when a link is present

[ericfode]

To reproduce:

1. Create a image resource that redeploys on update
2. Create a container resource that has a link
3. Run recipe

I think this is caused by the link flag being set improperly on the docker rm... It seems to want a bool not a string.

[bflad]

I definitely see the problem here. In comparison to #143, I can think of a few possible implementations that might suit us as well.

Maybe inside docker_container redeploy:

...
link = new_resource.link
new_resource.link = nil
remove if exists?
new_resource.link = link
...

Although having a separate remove_container method isn't too bad either, since we really don't need to remove the service files on redeploy. I'd just want to keep it DRY so remove also called remove_container.

We could also implement a docker_link LWRP for specifically handling links since its nuanced in comparison to behavior surrounding containers themselves, then we would remove the link flag from docker_container's remove. Aside with this approach: maybe Docker should also have the ability to add links to running containers, which doesn't currently exist and would have to be submitted?

Thoughts?

[bflad]

Speaking of the possibility of a docker_link LWRP, I can also think of situations where we'd also want a docker_volume LWRP as well, for the similar reasons. docker rm --volumes=VOLUMES CONTAINER has same nuance as docker rm --link=LINK CONTAINER

That said, we could support actions such as remove_link and remove_volumes on docker_container too. Confusing yet? :)

[ericfode]

Hahaha maybe this would be a good spot to start using the docker api?
On May 4, 2014 2:41 PM, "Brian Flad" notifications@github.com wrote:

Speaking of the possibility of a docker_link LWRP, I can also think of
situations where we'd also want a docker_volume LWRP as well, for the
similar reasons. docker rm --volumes=VOLUMES CONTAINER has same nuance as docker
rm --link=LINK CONTAINER

That said, we could support actions such as remove_link and remove_volumes
on docker_container too. Confusing yet? :)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/142#issuecomment-42146131
.

[bflad]

Haha maybe so but only if we have feature parity across the board.

[bflad]

I believe this commit will close this issue: e298547

Took your approach of a separate remove_container method as well as splitting out new remove_link and remove_volume actions. I'll release it in 0.35.0.