Updates to build service

[yusf]

Glorious! Never expected this component to be released but I’m pleasantly surprised.

[rmdes]

This is an amazing release ! I'v just installed it, will test later with some docker images I wanted to have installed

[yusf]

The buildbot will thus be down moving forward.

Wait, indefinitely or for now? I still need it

Is it important what tag name to choose? I'm a newb in this regard.

[girish]

@yusf Don't even need buildbot anymore (architecturally). We integrated docker based images into the platform proper. https://cloudron.io/documentation/custom-apps/tutorial/ (It's all part of 4.3 which is mostly rolled out now, will make release announcement tomorrow).

[yusf]

@girish Sounds good, I think. What are the steps to install custom apps past 4.3 then?

[murgero]

@yusf The build service app claims it might remove docker images in use by other apps so be careful - otherwise I've been using the same install method since I started using cloudron - looks like the process is the same, and they also streamlined it some which is great as well!

[cameragiare]

This post is deleted!

[yusf]

@murgero But then you run a second Cloudron with the build service app on it?

[girish]

@yusf Correct, it is best to run the build service app in a separate cloudron. Essentially, the build service is building a lot of docker images. It "cleans up" old images periodically. For both of these operations, it requires full access to docker. There is a chance that it removes containers/images of the other apps on Cloudron by mistake. As in, this would be a bug but if someone hits that bug on a production Cloudron that would be a disaster. This is the reason why we recommend running it on a separate Cloudron.

Finally, the build service app is not required at all. You can just build and push images from your laptop or a linux VM or some VPS which has docker.

[Lonk]

Using this app / build service on a local Cloudron instance - is there a way to take the push out of the cloudron build aspect of this since it's all local. Would save a lot of time when developing locally (if it's even feasible, I don't understand the purpose of the push part tbh).

[girish]

I think in theory it's possible. But of course, one can only deploy on the server where it was built. There's also some logic in the app to clean up images, which probably has to be fixed up.

[Lonk]

@girish It's not a huge deal, but I really like the service, and removing the push step + introducing some extra clean up logic would be welcome by me anytime. Just no rush. ️