bocker VS garden

A (joke?) one-liner I came up with while thinking about solutions to centralized container management across multiple SSH hosts. Shame on me.

The name is inspired by bocker [0], albeit this doesn't re-implement docker-compose in bash, I found it to be fitting enough.

I'd love to see someone come up with a smarter and/or shorter way to do this.

[0] https://github.com/p8952/bocker

When I did a talk about docker I also wanted to show a bit of what it does under the hood without going through all the layers and without too much details. This ~120 lines of shell script is really good in providing just an intro into what's needed for containers: https://github.com/p8952/bocker/blob/master/bocker

i tried it and like the concnpt, but until it can be launched via a systemd userspace service (without previously manually booting it) among other problems i will keep using docker (or bocker)

> But you couldn't reimplement podman in a few hundred lines of code.

You don't even need a few hundred: https://github.com/p8952/bocker

And then there's 'dokku' which IIRC, started as a bash version of Heroku.

> Not all ideas have the same quality.

They really do. I've heard all kinds of things in my career, but almost none I would want to dedicate a portion of my life building. Not because they are bad ideas or won't work, but because of the person with the idea or it just didn't interest me. Those people went on to be moderately successful (like hundreds of millions worth) but I'm glad I wasn't on that ride.

Bocker is in this same category...docker clone in bash that's helpful in seeing what's really happening underneath with nsenter, namespaces, network bridging, cgroups, etc.

https://github.com/p8952/bocker

Docker implemented in around 100 lines of bash: https://github.com/p8952/bocker

This is the most mindblowing example for enterprise security teams that think Docker is a new threat on a single tenant Linux host.

No, buddies, all this stuff is already there. If you were fine with your visibility before*, you're still fine. Go find a real problem while we play with our developer dopamine.

* NARRATOR: They shouldn't have been.

Bocker[1] does a reasonably good job of showing the value of Docker was mostly in Docker hub.

[1] https://github.com/p8952/bocker

There is a cool project I've seen called "bocker" (https://github.com/p8952/bocker) which is something of a proof of concept of implementing Docker with bash, which speaks a bit to how Docker is indeed in many ways an amalgam of lower level primitives (such as chroot as you mentioned). Pretty neat!

Hey there! Have you tried garden.io for caching? We also cache tests. Pretty much anything that's possible to cache. We're open source at https://github.com/garden-io/garden

To add to what's already been said: If you think about it, CI pipelines are typically a complete description of how your system is built, tested, and deployed.

Which is pretty fantastic except for how walled off they are. You can't really re-use these descriptions for e.g. development, they're not vendor agnostic, and they only way to run them is by pushing your code.

Maybe it's a silly analogy but it's almost like being a web dev that doesn't have a browser and needs to send their code to a friend who can tell them if that font size looks good.

I think we're way over due for freeing these "blueprints" of our system from the confines of CI and making them portable and flexible. And containers are the technology that's enabling that.

Full disclaimer (as always): I work at Garden[0] where we're also solving that problem but taking a slightly different approach to Dagger (it's still a DAG). Garden config is declarative and the jobs (we call them actions) have a semantic meaning. You can e.g. have a Build action of type container or a Deploy action of type Helm and Garden will figure out what to do with it.

[0] https://github.com/garden-io/garden

Yes, there's us over at https://github.com/garden-io/garden! We're big believers in pipelines that run anywhere. I even made a short little video that should give you the gist. [1]

Some of the short-list of differences: we use YAML for our configuration language, Dagger can use full-fat languages to define its pipelines. Our feature scope is broader: you can use us to vend IDP-like stacks to your developers if you're a Platform Team; we make development with remote Kubernetes clusters very easy, including all the remote image builds; and we have a number of integrations so you can bring your IaC tool of choice (Pulumi, Terraform) into your pipeline and set up service -> infra dependencies.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFnan6s2cDg

Me too. In fact Garden (dev tooling for the Kubernetes)[0] is a Berlin start-up with three Icelandic founders.

And if I'm not mistaken, two of us worked briefly with @halldorel (above commenter) at an earlier Icelandic start-up. It's a small world (if you're Icelandic).

[0] https://garden.io

There are dedicated tools just for that. Apart from skaffold check also tilt.dev, garden.io, devspace.sh, okteto.com

Would appreciate any insights on garden.io. Thanks.

Telepresence, tilt, garden.io, okteto, skaffold etc.

- https://garden.io/

haha, do my pictures give off a strong not-web-dev vibe? Either way your right, I'm focusing on devxp and automation for kubernetes. Because my work is open source you can see it here https://github.com/garden-io/garden (btw we're also hiring another open core dev like me)