Removing image option from buildable services

[dbpolito]

While this is a good option in some cases, it currently can lead into problems.

Right now if you use vessel into multiple projects, and customize the Dockerfile of one of the projects, it won't use it as the image name is shared, so it will always use the image from the first project you build.

Removing it will basically use the Project Name of the project, which is the folder name...

So now image names for the projects will be:

• vessel/app => project1_app
• vessel/node => project1_node
• vessel/app => project2_app
• vessel/node => project2_node

[mfour-merickson]

@fideloper Hey Chris, any plans to merge this in the near future. This very item bit me yesterday and caused me some wasted debugging time.

cc: @dbpolito

[fideloper]

not currently, but it may change.

However you should know that I’ll likely err on the side of documenting that you’ll need to change the image name yourself in the use case where you customize it per project.

From the project stand point it’s too much support work to have a different image name per project for things like updating Vessel and debugging issues in general.

In other words, vessel is what it is (by necessity!) If you customize it, you’ll need to own your customizations. On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:30 Mike Erickson [email protected] wrote:

@fideloper https://github.com/fideloper Hey Chris, any plans to merge this in the near future. This very item bit me yesterday and caused me some wasted debugging time.

cc: @dbpolito https://github.com/dbpolito

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned.

Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/shipping-docker/vessel/pull/66#issuecomment-373787509, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAch08BbSrT4eHIocopANoEnQBUJQAc7ks5te_atgaJpZM4SP4xx .

[mikeerickson]

@fideloper Fair enough, I can appreciate that statement and documentation update should be more than sufficient. Having been a former mantainer of laradock, I can completely sympathies with you want to avoid feature creep

[mikeerickson]

@fideloper Further, the "less" changes to core, the easier it is to maintain personal customization. I was working on an idea of a way of extending vessel to allow end user hooks which may be a better overall solution in the long run for supporting end user customization