4 ms·

Nice :) I believe Vagrant also now has built-in support for Docker which is very useful for starting up ancillary services that your app needs: https://docs.vag

by ddollar 12y ago

Nice :) I believe Vagrant also now has built-in support for Docker which is very useful for starting up ancillary services that your app needs: https://docs.vagrantup.com/v2/provisioning/docker.html https://docs.vagrantup.com/v2/provisioning/docker.html I quite like Vagrant myself but my primary complaint is that I seem to spend a lot of time waiting for VMs to start up and run a lot of bootstrap code.

mitchellh 12y ago
Nice to talk to you again David! You're linking to the wrong thing. This is the proper comparison to Tug: https://docs.vagrantup.com/v2/docker/index.html https://docs.vagrantup.com/v2/docker/index.html Re your complaint: with the Docker provider, Vagrant only spins up _one_ VM (if you're not on Linux). After that, `vagrant up` just executes `docker` directly so there is no waiting around for bootstrapping. It even detects if you have Docker installed locally or not to decide whether it needs to run in the VM or not. And, if you're on Linux, it doesn't use a VM at all, unless you're on a kernel that doesn't support Docker, in which case it automatically/transparently starts the VM. EDIT: Responding to David's comment below since it would go to deep: Vagrant is basically the same here. It doesn't require Dockerfiles, you can just spin up images.
- ddollar 12y ago
  Awesome :) I think then that the primary difference with Tug is that it can work in a "hybrid" virtualized/local mode if you haven't yet written a Dockerfile/Vagrantfile/other for your app. Tug can start by simply spawning dependencies like Postgres and Redis and let you incrementally move towards a Dockerfile for your app.
  - ddollar 12y ago
    Thank you for the kind words and the clarifications Mitchell :) Tug is a simple tool that I wrote to scratch a personal itch around working with dockerized applications and trying to optimize for startup speed and writing as absolutely little configuration as possible. I'm hoping to get a few other people to try it out and let me know if it works for them and if it's useful, especially given the existence of so many other tools of this nature.

by ddollar 12y ago

mitchellh 12y ago

Nice to talk to you again David! You're linking to the wrong thing. This is the proper comparison to Tug: https://docs.vagrantup.com/v2/docker/index.html https://docs.vagrantup.com/v2/docker/index.html Re your complaint: with the Docker provider, Vagrant only spins up _one_ VM (if you're not on Linux). After that, `vagrant up` just executes `docker` directly so there is no waiting around for bootstrapping. It even detects if you have Docker installed locally or not to decide whether it needs to run in the VM or not. And, if you're on Linux, it doesn't use a VM at all, unless you're on a kernel that doesn't support Docker, in which case it automatically/transparently starts the VM. EDIT: Responding to David's comment below since it would go to deep: Vagrant is basically the same here. It doesn't require Dockerfiles, you can just spin up images.

ddollar 12y ago
Awesome :) I think then that the primary difference with Tug is that it can work in a "hybrid" virtualized/local mode if you haven't yet written a Dockerfile/Vagrantfile/other for your app. Tug can start by simply spawning dependencies like Postgres and Redis and let you incrementally move towards a Dockerfile for your app.
- ddollar 12y ago
  Thank you for the kind words and the clarifications Mitchell :) Tug is a simple tool that I wrote to scratch a personal itch around working with dockerized applications and trying to optimize for startup speed and writing as absolutely little configuration as possible. I'm hoping to get a few other people to try it out and let me know if it works for them and if it's useful, especially given the existence of so many other tools of this nature.