build-push-action VS progscrape

I think that's along the lines of what you're describing as a Depot GitHub Action: https://github.com/depot/build-push-action.

Like our depot/build-push-action, you can use GitHub's OpenID Connect tokens via a trust relationship, so your builds can authenticate with Depot projects without needing any static access tokens. Here is an example GitHub Action workflow that builds images from a docker-bake.hcl file:

It should be just as as straightforward with Depot as well - we have a depot/build-push-action (https://github.com/depot/build-push-action) that accepts the same inputs as docker/build-push-action to make it easy (under the hood, both use BuildKit).

    steps:

I’m making use of this in a few of my projects (https://github.com/progscrape/progscrape/ and https://github.com/mmastrac/stylus/ so far) and I’m quite happy with the quality-of-life improvements. Happy to share it with the community-at-large and solicit ideas/feedback. PRs welcome!

If ARM continues to take off, this will be a pretty useful tool. I'm building Rust native binaries for one of my projects using buildx, but it's 1) way too slow using buildx emulation and 2) way too slow to build on the Pi itself.

In the end I created a hacky build process where I use a single container to build both the x64 and ARM versions, and then create multi-arch containers in a separate step. It was very painful to get the right native libraries installed as well.

In short, having access to real ARM builders would be great, and persistent disks would probably boost my build performance quite a bit.

The dockerfile that I had to use: https://github.com/mmastrac/progscrape/blob/master/Dockerfil...

Example build run (~20 mins): https://github.com/mmastrac/progscrape/actions/runs/42285298...