If you continue to not find what you need and are willing to be a subject matter expert on what Pivotal actually is (because I never saw it), I would be interested in building this. A lot of people share your sentiment so it could be successful, but it's hard to clone something unless you know the thing.
Please not yet another failed clone attempt. If you never used it, you have absolutely zero chance of replicating it, its something you need to have experienced.
Also disadvantaged groups might consume less healthcare and might be less aware of air quality, etc. and so may be more likely to have bad health outcomes for given environmental inputs.
DOCKER_HOST=“ssh://user@remotehost” docker-compose up -d
It works with plain docker, too. Another user is getting at the same idea when they mention docker contexts, which is just a different way to set the variable.
Did you know about this approach? In the snippet above, the image will be built on the remote machine and then run. The context (files) are sent over the wire as needed. Subsequent runs will use the remote machine's docker cache. It's slightly different than your approach of building locally, but much simpler.
No, in my example the docker-compose.yml would exist alongside your application's source code and you can use the `build` directive https://docs.docker.com/reference/compose-file/services/#bui... to instruct the remote host (Hetzner VPS, or whatever else) to build the image. That image does not go to an external registry, but is used internal to that remote host.
For 3rd party images like `postgres`, etc., then yes it will pull those from DockerHub or the registry you configure.
But in this method you push the source code, not a finished docker image, to the server.
Seems like it makes more sense to build on the build machine, and then just copy images out to PROD servers. Having source code on PROD servers is generally considered bad practice.
The source code does not get to the filesystem on the prod server. It is sent to the Docker daemon when it builds the image. After the build ends, there's only the image on the prod server.
I am now convinced that this is a hidden docker feature that too many people aren't aware of and do not understand.
Yeah, I definitely didn't understand that! Thanks for explaining. I've bookmarked this thread, because there's several commands that look more powerful and clean than what I'm currently doing which is to "docker save" to TAR, copy the TAR up to prod and then "docker load".
I assume they are saying that in practice, if wealth gives one influence (if one lives in capitalism), one will use that influence to make one's market less free to one's benefit.
Do what the sibling comment says or set DOCKER_HOST environment variable. Watch out, your local environment will be used in compose file interpolation!
HTMX has a very nice drag and drop extension I just found, though. And old-school forms can include image files. The little image preview can be a tiny "island of JS" if you have to have it.
> The little image preview can be a tiny "island of JS" if you have to have it.
I would consider that the bare acceptable minimum along an upload progress indicator.
But it can get a lot more complicated. What if you need to upload multiple images? What if you need to sort the images, add tags, etc? See for example the image uploading experience of sites like Unsplash or Flickr.
HTMX just ism't the right tool to solve this unless you're ready to accept a very rudimentary UX.
None of what you described requires anything more than an isolated island with some extra JS. No need for complex client-side state, no need for a SPA framework, no bundling required, not even TypeScript. If you relied on DOM and a couple of hidden fields, 90% of this would be a few dozen lines of code plus some JSDoc for type safety.
I could be misremembering, but didn't browsers used to have this built in? Like there used to be a status bar that showed things like network activity (before we moved to a world where there is always network activity from all of the spying), upload progress, etc.
I don't remember if it was in Firefox, but SeaMonkey even has a "pull the plug" button to quickly go offline/online in the status bar.
Bizarre that "progress" is removing basic functionality and then paying legions of developers to re-add it in inconsistent ways everywhere.
