We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build container images
1–7 of 7 posts
Re: We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build container images
#2Really interested to give this a try. I haven't used RWX for CI yet (overall my builds wouldn't have benefited enough from the caching), but docker build times are definitely a pebble in my shoe
Re: We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build container images
#3We use jib at work (https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/jib) which also skips the Dockerfile and builds an image for a Java project directly.
This certainly looks like a much nicer experience than docker build, especially given that there can be a cache hit after a cache miss.
Re: We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build container images
#4Am I missing something or does rwx not have a free/self-hosted option?
Re: We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build container images
#5Am I missing something or does rwx not have a free/self-hosted option?
Hey! I'm one of the RWX cofounders. We don't have a self-hosted option yet, but we're interested in opening it up in the future. Our infrastructure is more complex to run than normal self-hosted runners infrastructure, due to extensive caching and provisioning optimizations.
Re: We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build container images
#6Excited to check this out! Been using rwx and it's already much faster than github actions. Interested to see how this speeds up our builds.
Re: We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build container images
#7Love these problems being solved at a platform level rather than just a language level.