What exactly would be the point of shoving a script that is nothing more than a simple cronjob and that could theoretically just be compiled as a static binary into a Docker container?
Had you replied in a respectful manner, you would have gotten a reply from me with what I think are legitimate reasons for having this script in a docker image.
The required degree of respect was exhausted by the question of what the advantages were. This rampant epidemic of wanting to dump everything into some kind of "container" and "image" was quite funny for a while, but is now just annoying.
It took more energy to respond in such an abrasive way, than it would've to just ignore the comment if you found it so silly. Go take your social ineptitude elsewhere
Actually, since I am unfamiliar with the requirements to run a lisp script I thought a docker image would provide all necessary dependencies (SBCL? Quicklisp?) without the necessity to investigating myself and installing them directly on my machine.
Secondly, after this would be obviously installed for checking and testing functionality for meeting my personal the requirements, it is much more easy to uninstall all dependencies by stopping and removing a container then manually removing all packages in case of not needing it.
Thirdly, a service like that would be installed on my home server, which separates the OS installation and other extra services by having all extra services inside docker containers keeping the OS "clean".
Dude, it was only a question. You could've just said no instead of going on some weird rant. There are plenty of reasons for containerization, but it seems like engaging in any sort of conversation with you is pointless.
> You could've just said no instead of going on some weird rant.
"Dude", I could, but then a valid follow-up would have been something like "why not?", and I think that I have sufficiently covered this.
> There are plenty of reasons for containerization
"Bro", I understand that containerization would make a small amount of sense under the following circumstances:
- The software in question was a giant package with a quadrillion dependencies which all interfere with each other. rssparser.lisp is not.
- The software in question will need to be deployed on a metric ton of very different machines. rssparser.lisp can easily be deployed without this additional layer.
> it seems like engaging in any sort of conversation with you is pointless.
You haven't even tried yet. I'm open for any kind of discussion, but it would probably help both sides if the subject was "how to improve the software", don't you think?
You replied with a comment that ended like so "into a fucking Docker container?"
As a third party here (and not the person you asked), it's fairly easy to assume that someone who pretends to be "Looking forward to feedback" and then responds with "fucking" and being rude is really just trolling here and not interested in reasonable and adult conversations.
At the very least, you know you were wrong, because you've been editing your comments to make it seem less aggressive.
My honest suggestion: apologize, and get offline. There is no reason to be acting like this.
I thought that being rude towards Docker containers - because I /really/ don't like the containerization of every single shell script that is happening these days - will hurt nobody's feelings. It seems that I was wrong. But now that I rephrased the comment, could we please talk about the subject now?
