Create a Docker image

[frans-ebu]

Suggestion to create a Docker image to help users install their own copy easily.

[nigelmegitt]

Are there any licensing or pricing impacts? I'm pretty comfortable with the idea, just don't want any unpleasant unintentional consequences!

[frans-ebu]

Good question. I thought not. It is true that the Docker license itself is Apache and not BSD-3. But the Docker image is just an extra for us, it is not mandatory for using the code. So no problem?

http://54.71.194.30:4015/faq/

[kozmaz87]

Apache is compatible with us so yeah this could be a good idea.

[kozmaz87]

It has been ages since I played with Docker... My old friend here we meet again :)

[nigelmegitt]

I would expect the Docker license to be independent of our license so I'm not worried from that perspective. I'm worried more if there's a license or pricing requirement for anyone wanting to use Docker to get the image and make it run. I think from a quick scan that it is just a single one-off cloud license for Docker and then anyone can use it, but I'm not familiar with the platform so I'm not sure if there are any "gotchas" to look out for.

[frans-ebu]

I am not aware of any "gotchas". And I don't think you need to pay a cloud license (you don't have to use their cloud service!).

[nigelmegitt]

Even better! Does EBU already use Docker?

[frans-ebu]

Yes, for several projects. We will be using it for https://ebu.io/qc soon, too.

[nigelmegitt]

In that case, I see no reason not to go ahead. Do you want to "make it happen" @frans-ebu ?

[frans-ebu]

Yes, and no. I want to, but I see it as low prio (see milestone) and as I am not an expert on this (but I do have a very nice book on it ;-)), I will not make it happen any time soon.

[nigelmegitt]

OK, fine with me. Is there a particular reason why you think we should add it?

[frans-ebu]

Because it can provide a lower threshold for users to try out the code (keeps the set up well insulated from any other code; easy to deploy).

[nigelmegitt]

Right, understood - I was wondering if you had a specific date-related reason. Thanks!

[andreastai]

I would fully support this. This would ease quick testing of what the components can do.

[nigelmegitt]

Although this would help with getting runnable code it is also worth checking out the configurator branch and building the documentation to take a look at it - I think the configuration scheme is now much easier to use to create sensible components and see what they can do.

If anyone wants to put some time and effort into addressing this particular issue I would be happy for that to happen, I should add. It's not a priority for me at the moment.

[spoeschel]

For a Docker image any dependencies/cache files/repo files that are not needed in such a case should not be included into the image (or removed during the same RUN command, to not be included into the same layer). For example the following components are not required then:

• node.js, including the nunjucks package; used for UI aspects only
• the Python packages listed in requirements.txt (except -e . for the project itself); used for documentation/testing only
• the docs and testing repo folders
• the pip cache
• the pip and wheel modules, after everything has been installed