restruct VS skaffold

For me it's mux and my personal router restruct but since mux is not maintained anymore, maybe chi will be my goto for new projects that needs more stability in the api. Since restruct is a router based on structs, which I use for fast prototyping.

Not the best, but after using gorilla mux for routing for a while, I've decided to build my own https://github.com/altlimit/restruct

I've always just use gorilla mux and try to stay close to standard handlers as much as possible and code my request response process. As I've done this multiple times and actually been doing things over and over again I've developed my own router based on structs. Most of the time I develop something that's not going to be public api so I just want to easily build endpoints from struct method without defining new routes. I made https://github.com/altlimit/restruct for it. I also made it flexible so it can do a good amount of routing config. Then with same idea on authentication I made gauth. It's under the same org of that repository. Just to make my development for clients faster while sticking close to standards. I can't find myself using those frameworks that keeps introducing their own context somehow. I did use them before but somehow just doesn't feel right.

github.com/altlimit/restruct

A nice middle ground is using a tool like Google's Skaffold, which provides "Bazel-like" capabilities for composing Docker images and tagging them based on a number of strategies, including file manifests. In my case, I also use build args to explicitly set versions of external dependencies.

While I am in a Typescript environment with this setup at the moment, my personal experience that Skaffold with Docker has a lighter implementation and maintenance overhead than Bazel. (You also get the added benefit of easy deployment and automatic rebuilds.)

I quite liked using Bazel in a small Golang monorepo, but I ran into pain when trying to do things like include third-party pre-compiled binaries in the Docker builds, because of the unusual build rules convention. The advantage of Skaffold is it provides a thin build/tag/deploy/verify layer over Docker and other container types. Might be worth a look!

Kudos to the Google team building it! https://skaffold.dev

To get a similar experience of preevy up, first we’ll need to split the build and deploy using process or alternatively employ tools that orchestrate build-tag-push-update-sync flow like Skaffold/Tilt.

We will be using docker and microk8s from Canonical. For running our software during development, we will be using skaffold which is a great tool developed by Google.

To add more context, if you are developing containers in a local dev environment, the minimum you should have is the Google Cloud SDK and Skaffold. The SDK will allow you to programmatically interact with Googleapis e.g. auth, services, resources. Skaffold will allow you to build and deploy to the cloud similar to working with a local dev environment.

I have used both Skaffold and Devspace. I prefer the latter.

I wonder if it has some overlap with https://skaffold.dev/.

K3d and Skaffold for local development

skaffold.dev - build in k8s - no more asking for the database password. All the plumbing to the backend is just done so it's easier for them to test and demo any branch