I'm new to Docker and feeling my way around. My plan is to build a typical web app using Nginx+Rails+Postgress, all of which will be in the one container. I'm not (currently) doing anything complex like linking images.
I'm a lone developer, and my build process thus far is:
- Edit Dockerfile
- docker build
- Fix bugs, and if I like the outcome then commit the Dockerfile to a git repo.
- Iterate over steps 1-3 as I change the build.
- docker push my/image periodically, as useful versions emerge.
Why instead would I not:
- docker pull a basic image e.g. Ubuntu
- docker run -t -i my/image /bin/bash
- wget http://git.host.com/installation-script.sh | bash
- If bugs then scrap image and edit installation-script.sh to fix bugs.
- Iterate over 1-4.
- docker push my/image periodically, as above.
I'm aware of issues with 'wget shell-script | bash', however it would be more familiar to me.
Instinctively I feel that using a Dockerfile is the best way to go, but I'm not sure why. I think it would be useful for Docker beginners to understand why Dockerfile is (or isn't) best practice. If I was deploying linked containers would I realise the awesome power of the Dockerfile? Does Dockerfile affect the "quality" (size, whatever?) of the final image?
