> There doesn't seem to be a _huge_ drawback to running an Ubuntu image vs Alpine, aside from the image size. I switched from using Alpine for my own images to

> There doesn't seem to be a _huge_ drawback to running an Ubuntu image vs Alpine, aside from the image size. I switched from using Alpine for my own images to using Ubuntu instead a while ago: https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/using-ubuntu-as-the-base-for-all-of-my-containers https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/using-ubuntu-as-the-base-fo... So far, it's surprisingly nice. Ubuntu based images take up more space, but thanks to layer reuse and storage being affordable, this isn't a big issue in practice (at my scale). There are no surprises in regards to performance or package management that I have to deal with. Actually, I can use Ubuntu/Linux Mint locally and have the same install instructions for tools/dependencies as well (if I want to test things outside of containers, running on the system directly). It's also really nice to be able to build my own base image with whatever tools I want available (e.g. nano and some debugging stuff) and have them be available in all of the language/stack-specific images that I build later. The EOL is also pretty long and I don't think that there's any shame in having a "good enough" and somewhat boring distro for most dev stuff, only occasionally looking at PPAs for newer stuff. That said, Alpine and Debian are both fine as well! I still run Bitnami images for most complex software like databases, which I think used Debian as a base: https://bitnami.com/stacks/containers https://bitnami.com/stacks/containers