-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 72
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Are the images still considered 'experimental'? #46
Comments
Thanks for the nudge on this @nejch. I belive we can say that after 4 years, some of the experimental bits of this repo has gone away. The disclaimer was copied over from https://github.com/beevelop/docker-nodejs-python which I used as a basis back in the day. Now that you mention it, there are a few things we could do before removing the disclaimer, in sinking priority:
What do you think? |
Thanks for all the follow-up issues @nikolaik. If I find some time I can try to take a look as well eventually :) Calver makes sense to me, would those be reflected in the docker tags? I guess the loose flavors from https://hub.docker.com/r/nikolaik/python-nodejs would then still be present, e.g something like |
Hey @nikolaik, you might see a bit more activity from me in the near future to tackle some of the issues above. It might help our organization avoid maintaining some internal images. One question/suggestion, and not quite sure how to approach it as Docker images are not easily migrated. Your image is by far the most popular/downloaded node+python image that I could find. But it being published in a personal namespace makes some people a bit wary of using it as opposed to those from organizations. Have you considered making or transferring to a dedicated namespace (at least on GitHub) where there might be other maintainers? I'm not sure if there's an existing umbrella org for Docker images like that, similar to e.g. github.com/psf, github.com/pytest-dev etc. I realize rebuilding an image continuously doesn't take that much work as you've been building this successfully for years. But I guess mostly it's also about optics and the "only maintainer just suddenly disappeared" scenarios :) |
Thanks for publishing these images @nikolaik. Seems like they get quite a lot of pulls (10M+) and are sometimes used as a base for images built by established orgs - for example, in https://github.com/sourcegraph/scip-python.
But there's this:
I see this was added 6 years ago when the readme was first added. Is this still considered true or was that just at the start?
Edit: I just noticed #43 - this would possibly ensure some kind of stability as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: