So, basicaly, you're saying that you don't want to mess with that setup and use existing stuff... which you could achieve with everything as long as someone else do the setup for you. I don't see where Docker is better for a developper in this case... providing a vagrant box is exactly the same.
jfoutz|11 years ago
lemieux|11 years ago
I'm not saying that vagrant > docker. The way I see it, docker is great if your infrastructure is using it all the way. If your prod setup if not dockerized, using docker in dev seems to me counterproductive than spinning up a VM and provisionning it with ansible or puppet to achieve production replication. As @netcraft said, I don't see why I should "change my server architecture" to use docker in dev.
St-Clock|11 years ago
I totally agree that startup time of a container is far less than a VM, but I don't see how docker "removes all the trouble of running applications that you need for your development: databases, application servers, queues"
You still need to install, configure these services, make sure that the containers can talk to each other in a reliable and secure way, etc.
saryant|11 years ago
In the end, it's just so slow that nobody uses it locally. Even on a beefy Macbook Pro, spinning up the six VMs it needs takes nearly 20 minutes.
We're looking at moving towards docker, both for local use and production, and so far I'm excited by what I've seen but multi-host use still needs work. I'm evaluating CoreOS at the moment and I'm hopeful about it.