tini VS angie

yes busybox httpd or civetweb is even smaller, both around 300kb.

for tini you mean https://github.com/krallin/tini? how large is your final docker image, why not just alpine in that case which is musl+busybox

Tini, a useful process manager for containerized apps

Ah gotcha. I believe it can be baked into images as well, per the entrypoint example in the readme: https://github.com/krallin/tini

Not sure how this will fare IRL in k8s as I haven’t much experience there. It’s still silly that this is the default behavior where you need something like Tini, but I digress.

To be fair, even for running a single process the pitfalls are real. I've been seeing Tini[1] a lot for these situations.

I just read in the README that Tini is included by Docker since 1.13 if using --init flag.

[1] https://github.com/krallin/tini

The default init process used is the first docker-init executable found in the system path of the Docker daemon process. This docker-init binary, included in the default installation, is backed by tini.

AFAIK It's for the init process to reparent zombie processes. See TINI

The second easiest (and most common when your entry point is a bash script) is to use a fake init tool like tini

32 user: Dmitry Volyntsev

Source: https://hg.nginx.org/nginx/

Valentin, Ruslan and Vladimir currently are working on Angie.

Igor actually doesn't contribute to nginx since 2012... there are only few small commits after these dates, most of his contributions are between 2002 and 2012.

Maxim now works on freenginx alone. And here is a response from Angie developer about consolidation with freenginx: https://github.com/webserver-llc/angie/issues/74 - why it won't happen.

They also seem to be tracking upstream(?) changes https://github.com/webserver-llc/angie/commit/20da8e2aa00270...

(it's BSD-2-Clause if that interests you)