Djoss

[CA] Docker template versioning?

5 posts in this topic

I don't know if it's something that has been already discussed, but I think that having a version inside templates would be useful.

 

This would allow addition of mechanisms to inform users about updates developers are doing to their templates.  For example, if a new parameter is added to a template, all users that have already installed the Docker application won't have it and won't be aware of it.

 

A simple mechanism would be to add version checks in the Fix Common Problems plugin.  In case of version mismatch, one of the recommendation could be to re-install the container using default settings.

 

I see benefits in the following situations:

  • A fix has been made to the template.  For example, fixing a bad default permission of a volume.  If users are not aware that a new template fixes some issues, they will have to look at the support thread.  The same questions/problems are more likely to be reported by multiple users.
  • A new feature has been added.  This feature may required the usage of a new environment variable.  Unless the container documentation (if any) is read, users are not aware of this new parameter.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Djoss said:

I don't know if it's something that has been already discussed, but I think that having a version inside templates would be useful.

 

This would allow addition of mechanisms to inform users about updates developers are doing to their templates.  For example, if a new parameter is added to a template, all users that have already installed the Docker application won't have it and won't be aware of it.

 

A simple mechanism would be to add version checks in the Fix Common Problems plugin.  In case of version mismatch, one of the recommendation could be to re-install the container using default settings.

 

I see benefits in the following situations:

  • A fix has been made to the template.  For example, fixing a bad default permission of a volume.  If users are not aware that a new template fixes some issues, they will have to look at the support thread.  The same questions/problems are more likely to be reported by multiple users.
  • A new feature has been added.  This feature may required the usage of a new environment variable.  Unless the container documentation (if any) is read, users are not aware of this new parameter.

 

Good idea, but needs an overhaul of dockerMan to accomplish.

 

dockerMan when saving the my* templates does not save any tags that are not basically already present in the template presented to the user (it does add one or two extra though like date-added / installed).  eg: if you compare the templates that are stored in /var/lib/docker/unraid/community-templates (which is what CA passes), they have far more tags present than what is saved post install in /boot/config/plugins/dockerMan/templates-user.

 

Personally, I would like every tag that is passed through to dockerMan at install to be saved with the user-template.  (If only for future possible additions to dockerMan)

 

Although not exactly what you're talking about, CA does have a "branch" feature which allows a single template to completely modify itself (what is passed to dockerMan) according to user input.  ( ie: if binhex implemented it, he could have a single sabnzbd that would either install the regular version or the vpn version, and the appropriate environment variables, repository, etc would all be populated accordingly), but that only works during installation.

 

Net result though is that because of this, FCP has zero clue about any extra tags to designate this because of how dockerMan operates.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a quick look to dockerMan code and it seems relatively simple to add a new XML field to the saved template.  I guess I can try to contribute by sending a pull request... :)

 

8 hours ago, Squid said:

Personally, I would like every tag that is passed through to dockerMan at install to be saved with the user-template.  (If only for future possible additions to dockerMan)

Is it something that someone already tried to push?  Are there any objections against that?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Djoss said:

Is it something that someone already tried to push?

Not to my knowledge

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just discovered that the TemplateURL field is used to update the template...  So a couple of scenarios are covered by this functionality.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

Copyright © 2005-2017 Lime Technology, Inc. unRAID® is a registered trademark of Lime Technology, Inc.