preevy VS skaffold

Feel free to star the Preevy repo here.

We at Livecycle, a Docker-centric company, are super excited to share some highlights from the event and discuss how we are developing our products, Livecycle Docker Extension and Preevy, to improve collaboration, feedback, etc., in the vision that Docker is moving with their recent development and announcement at DockerCon.

To learn more about how to use Preevy, just check out the docs site.

Historically, many developers have preferred to facilitate this type of collaboration with ephemeral preview environments that are triggered with every PR or commit. And indeed, we have built robust solutions like “Preevy” to facilitate the creation of these environments for dockerized applications on any cloud or Kubernetes cluster.

Preevy also integrates into your CI pipeline to convert your pull requests into easily shareable ephemeral environments

My typical day is filled with a couple of meetings, building the Lifecycle community on Slack, collaborating with projects and people, and creating strategies and content (videos, blogs, short forms for Twitter and LinkedIn) around the product to increase adoption. I heavily focus on the company’s Open Source offering called Preevy which helps create a preview environment using Docker Compose underneath.

Also, at Livecycle, we are building Preevy, which helps you create a preview environment for Docker Compose applications. Do check out https://github.com/livecycle/preevy. It's open source, and don't forget to leave a star to show your support.

Check out the docs here

A dedicated docs site with relevant technical information and how-to guides for people who want to use it

About “Preevy” - an open source tool that simplifies the creation of preview environments

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