3 ms·
They have their own installer now, that must have taken a _lot_ of work. I think they'd have been much better served by producing a Docker image and telling sel
by amouat 9y ago
They have their own installer now, that must have taken a _lot_ of work. I think they'd have been much better served by producing a Docker image and telling self-hosters to use that. Would have been easier, much more portable and less errorprone. As it is, the official Ghost image leave a lot to be desired.
- tedmiston 9y agoMore info on the new CLI / installer here: https://docs.ghost.org/docs/ghost-cli https://docs.ghost.org/docs/ghost-cli
- zimpenfish 9y agoI'm 100% not going to be installing it on my bare server. If they don't come out with a Docker image themselves, presumably someone else will (or I guess I'll make my own.) But it's definitely not running uncontainered.
- amouat 9y agoThe thing is, it's not as easy as it sounds - take a look at the issues on the official image :(
- pascalandy 9y agoYou guys should follow this issue: https://github.com/docker-library/ghost/issues/65 https://github.com/docker-library/ghost/issues/65 Looks like the Ghost team is welling to share an official Ghost Docker image after all :)