-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
[Proposal] Deprecate onbuild
tags
#2076
Comments
I'm +1, but I think we should also probably poke the maintainers of each of these images to see what their thoughts are as well. 👍 |
I'm still +1 on this after all this time (probably more strongly than before) -- let's cc some maintainers today to see if we get any strong, well-reasoned dissent. I've only seen the |
$ bashbrew list --all --uniq | grep onbuild | cut -d: -f1 | sort -u
clojure
django
erlang
golang
haxe
iojs
jruby
maven
mono
node
pypy
python
rails
ruby
sentry |
Please give #2076 (comment) a look and decide whether you have a strong opinion against this. If we don't get good arguments for keeping them (preferably with examples where they've been helpful, but not required), we'll be deprecating Concretely, this will mean updating the text in https://github.com/docker-library/docs/blob/20177c318c17c228ae44395feba8fe14f8aa6a3d/.template-helpers/variant-onbuild.md to note that they're deprecated and strongly discouraged, and removing the tags themselves from the "Supported" list of each image over time. |
For Sentry, onbuild is used as the base for https://github.com/getsentry/onpremise Granted, we could shuffle things around a bit, but I think Sentry's usage of onbuild is a much different story than those of say, python or node, etc. I'm open to accommodating if you want to nuke this concept entirely though. I feel it'd make sense to leave it up to the individual project though. |
I am 👍 on getting rid of |
I'm 👍 with deprecating |
Kill it with fire. |
This is very fine with me 👍🏼 Will solve some common problems! |
@mattrobenolt oh, neat! I'm happy to have As far as general policy goes, I think the consensus seems to be in line with what @yosifkit and I have observed, so if we do go forward with this, we'll simply have a policy that |
I also agree and prefer the example Dockerfile |
+1 for deprecating |
Kind of sad to see the move to push the -onbuild images out... They've been great, for me in terms of getting a project up/deployed quickly in, for example dokku. I mean, yeah, I can just put all the instructions that would be in -onbuild into the Dockerfile, beyond that, my build is usually a little more complex... that said, the onbuild images have been greatly appreciated. |
I'm 👍 to remove it |
@tracker1 I agree that they're useful, but the maintenance burden (in terms of user reports / education) is too high to justify continuing (at this level) -- I'd be all for a separate project incorporating a set of useful |
also remove the onbuild images for docker-library#2076
In 17.05, |
@cpuguy83 yeah, that's neat! Although for official images, it doesn't solve the maintainability problem, since we'll still have to explain to users how to use it repeatedly, or update it with hanky things like So even with that addition, I'm still of the opinion that for the official images, it makes sense for us to stick to providing a simple template in the image description for repository usage, and allow for some downstream project to take on the maintenance of |
The Docker project would like us to deprecate those: docker-library/official-images#2076
The Docker project would like us to deprecate those: docker-library/official-images#2076
the node:X-onbuild images are deprecated (see docker-library/official-images#2076 for more details) for the samples just rely on the base image
Onbuild images are deemed as 'useful but confusing'. Rather than produce onbuild images, projects should consider providing example Dockerfiles for consumers to use for reference. Almost all official Docker Hub project have removed their onbuilds now. Ref: docker-library/official-images#2076 Ref: docker-library/docs@3823017 Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
Onbuild images are deemed as 'useful but confusing'. Rather than produce onbuild images, projects should consider providing example Dockerfiles for consumers to use for reference. Almost all official Docker Hub project have removed their onbuilds now. Ref: docker-library/official-images#2076 Ref: docker-library/docs@3823017 Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
Onbuild images are deemed as 'useful but confusing'. Rather than produce onbuild images, projects should consider providing example Dockerfiles for consumers to use for reference. Almost all official Docker Hub project have removed their onbuilds now. Ref: docker-library/official-images#2076 Ref: docker-library/docs@3823017 Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <[email protected]>
docker onbuild have been deprecated in docker-library/official-images#2076 and aren't part of python docker images build since docker-library/python#314.
docker onbuild have been deprecated in docker-library/official-images#2076 and aren't part of python docker images build since docker-library/python#314.
docker onbuild have been deprecated in docker-library/official-images#2076 and aren't part of python docker images build since docker-library/python#314.
onbuild images [0] are deprecated go-wrapper [1] is deprecated [0] docker-library/official-images#2076 [1] docker-library/golang#205
JRuby 9.1 support is no longer provided in this config. onbuild support is dropped for 9.3+ per docker-library#2076.
the node:X-onbuild images are deprecated (see docker-library/official-images#2076 for more details) for the samples just rely on the base image
From our docs description of onbuild:
Users are often wanting customization on the order of the
onbuild
directives (some examples in this search). Since we recommend them only to get started, I think it would be better to just provide an example Dockerfile in the docs for these images.The following are the onbuild images:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: