4 ms·

I think this is about right. Nix feels pretty close to "right thing to do", but if the other solutions are more successful, it's a case of "worse is better".

I think this is about right. Nix feels pretty close to "right thing to do", but if the other solutions are more successful, it's a case of "worse is better". I think the important part is usability compared to what's already there. It's much easier to write a Dockerfile than to write something with Nix. You can get much stronger benefits from Nix than from a Dockerfile.. but, most of which you don't really need all the time. My impression is the other solutions are quick-ish hacks to solve problems that come from (and building upon) the complexities of systems built using quick-ish hacks. Nix feels like a more elegant solution, but it's also different enough that it's got a steep learning curve for anything harder than "install foo".

civodul 6y ago
I think users may find it easier to create a Docker image with `guix pack -f docker app1 app2` than to write a Dockerfile. As a bonus, the resulting Docker image is bit-reproducible and recipients of the image can "map it back" to the original Guix revision. https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/Invoking-guix-pack.html https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/Invoking-guix-pack....
- rgoulter 6y ago
  For the use case of "I need a Docker image with some programs", this command seems pretty neat. Nixery is a similar with Nix, where an image can be constructed ad-hoc by specifying the dependencies of an image's path. That's cool. And I can imagine cases where it's useful. Stuff like Nixery isn't itself enough to claim "nix is better than Docker", though. -- The questions I'd want to think about are "what happens when I run into a problem? how hard is it to fix this?". I feel like Nix does solve some problems that I've had with Dockerfiles. But there are also problems I've run into with Nix that I wouldn't've had with Nix. I like nix well enough. But I've also used it enough that I'm not surprised if people have difficulties with it, and are more comfortable with other solutions.

civodul 6y ago

I think users may find it easier to create a Docker image with `guix pack -f docker app1 app2` than to write a Dockerfile. As a bonus, the resulting Docker image is bit-reproducible and recipients of the image can "map it back" to the original Guix revision. https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/Invoking-guix-pack.html https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/Invoking-guix-pack....

rgoulter 6y ago
For the use case of "I need a Docker image with some programs", this command seems pretty neat. Nixery is a similar with Nix, where an image can be constructed ad-hoc by specifying the dependencies of an image's path. That's cool. And I can imagine cases where it's useful. Stuff like Nixery isn't itself enough to claim "nix is better than Docker", though. -- The questions I'd want to think about are "what happens when I run into a problem? how hard is it to fix this?". I feel like Nix does solve some problems that I've had with Dockerfiles. But there are also problems I've run into with Nix that I wouldn't've had with Nix. I like nix well enough. But I've also used it enough that I'm not surprised if people have difficulties with it, and are more comfortable with other solutions.