4 ms·

If I "just used Vagrant," I think I'd end up with a virtualbox VM, just like if I were to have used docker-machine.

• beat 11y ago
  Vagrant is more repeatable, though. It's straightforward to provision an environment. In my (limited) experience with direct Virtualbox, you wind up manually building a lot of stuff.
  • tlrobinson 11y ago
    docker-machine automates setting up a VM running Docker. There's nothing manual about it (besides running "docker-machine create dev" or whatever)
    • beat 11y ago
      Docker-machine drove me up a wall. Getting file sharing to work so I could use my nice Mac editors on my in-docker code was a huge waste of time and effort. Docker-machine was just another one of those crappy half-measures that keep Mac owners struggling to find a way to make Docker graceful. I was also motivated by bringing on new team members who were on Windows rather than Macs. Vagrant works fine and transparently on both Mac and Windows, with the same commands. It's not necessary for everyone, but I was pleased that my best Mac solution also works just as well on Windows.
      • knicholes 11y ago
        It's unfortunate you had such a bad experience with Docker. No doubt there's a steep learning curve to use more advanced features. If you're still willing to look in to it, I'd recommend taking at look at https://docs.docker.com/engine/userguide/dockervolumes/ https://docs.docker.com/engine/userguide/dockervolumes/ under "Mount a host directory as a data volume."