We use a CouchDB docker container for testing PouchDB and Fauxton. So my usage and requirements for docker instances are pretty narrow. I just need a development image that is up to date with master. Joan created this one https://hub.docker.com/r/couchdbdev/debian-8-dev/ based off the couchdb-docker/dev Dockerfile. This is perfect for our needs.
Cheers Garren On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Daniel Munch" <dani.mu...@gmail.com> > > > > Now for me it feels a little as if couchdb could go into the same > > direction. While couchdb-ci has already all the necessary build and > > test steps, those are sort of duplicated in couchdb-docker, only that > > in the latter it's a little harder to create all sorts of > > permutations > > of os/erlang version. For me, ideally, couchdb-ci would be able to > > create the end-user image just as another form of packaging. This > > would also mean that couchdb-docker could disappear at some point. > > With the build infrastructure already contained in couchdb-ci, the > > Dockerfiles representing the actual "runtime images" will become much > > simpler and may find their place in couchb-ci as well. > > Thanks Daniel, this is good food for thought. You should note that > we actually have a third repo, couchdb-pkg, that is used for all the > packaging content, just to make things confusing ;) Right now it includes > the Debian/Ubuntu (.deb) control files and the snap content, but will > soon include the CentOS packaging stuff as well. > > Indeed, if you look at couchdb-docker right now, you'll see that the > image installs all of the build chain tooling, then builds CouchDB, > then *uninstalls* the tools to shrink the resulting image. We may > very well be able to chain that part onto the couchdb-ci images > rather than duplicating the work. As for the other points you raise, > I need to think about it more. > > -Joan >
