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

Officially deprecate "rails" #503

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 5, 2016

Conversation

tianon
Copy link
Member

@tianon tianon commented Feb 26, 2016

Given what it is (just a framework), and looking through https://github.com/search?l=dockerfile&q=%22FROM+rails%22&type=Code, I think it's time we finally cut the cord.

@yosifkit
Copy link
Member

yosifkit commented Mar 3, 2016

Rails itself is included in the Gemfile of a project that uses rails so that most users might even be installing a different version of rails than the one included in rails:latest. It is still useful for the first initialization of a rails project. We could help ease users over to the ruby image if we install the apt packages required for most rails installations (https://github.com/docker-library/rails/blob/db9122c0525e0a9f76ed47dbfb26e8e25ca0af70/Dockerfile#L7).

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
This image is officially deprecated in favor of [the standard `ruby` image](https://hub.docker.com/_/ruby/), and will receive no further updates. Please adjust your usage accordingly.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe we should give a leniency period rather than this abrupt end. How about an EOL of maybe 6 months from now?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I was planning on doing so, but calling it out explicitly and giving it a specific EOL date probably makes sense. 👍

@tianon
Copy link
Member Author

tianon commented Apr 6, 2016

Yeah, I suppose it is somewhat useful for initializing a new project... So perhaps we just deprecate the onbuild version of it? Even initializing a new project is pretty hacky, and requires funky bind-mount stuff, so I'm still neutral leaning towards -1 on keeping the image around just for that.

As for the deps, they're not actually universally required, so I think the fact that this text explicitly calls out "for a project using PostgreSQL" is probably good enough -- folks should be able to figure out that if they use MySQL, they need to include whatever their bindings need for that to work... 😄 (but maybe those client bindings make some sense in buildpack-deps to a certain extent?)

Given what it is (just a framework), and looking through https://github.com/search?l=dockerfile&q=%22FROM+rails%22&type=Code, I think it's time we finally cut the cord.
@tianon
Copy link
Member Author

tianon commented May 20, 2016

I've replaced:

... and will receive no further updates.

with:

and will receive no further updates after 2016-12-31 (Dec 31, 2016).

Happy to bikeshed on a different date, but I figured setting it somewhere in the far future should give a plenty big window for existing users (if we merge soon, that's over half a year / 6 months). It seems a little long, but I didn't think this discussion was quite open and shut yet so it can serve as a concrete point to discuss around. 😄

@yosifkit
Copy link
Member

LGTM

@yosifkit yosifkit merged commit 855c896 into docker-library:master Jul 5, 2016
@yosifkit yosifkit deleted the deprecate-rails branch July 5, 2016 22:44
@yosifkit
Copy link
Member

yosifkit commented Jul 5, 2016

I though about the possibility of adding the sql clients from the rails image to buildpack-deps so that all language stacks can use them. On buildpack-deps:jessie it is about 45MB to add them:

$ docker images buildpack-deps
REPOSITORY          TAG                 IMAGE ID            CREATED             SIZE
buildpack-deps      temp                031a9584969b        5 seconds ago       655.4 MB
buildpack-deps      latest              f9f7b5cfe736        10 days ago         610 MB

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants