Closed misolietavec closed 7 years ago
Hi @misolietavec, This looks good to me. Thanks for leaving the original file too. Happy to merge :cake: cc/ @rgbkrk.
Thanks for merging @willingc and @misolietavec for sending a PR over.
tmpnb is just a service, nothing is intended to extend from the base image for it (as far as I know). The only reason to keep the other images with Debian etc. is to use common layers amongst an overall deployment (the numpy/scipy stack make the discussion here about sizing fairly moot).
I already use such image and think of it as an alternative to current image based on python:3.4-wheezy (very outdated) or maybe, newer python:3.5-slim. I left original Dockerfile untouched and added Dockerfile-alpine3.5. I do not use requirements.txt. The fixed versions of docker-py, tornado and pytz are installed with pip by RUN in Dockerfile-alpine3.5. It is on Jupyter developers to decide what to do further.
Image misolietavec/tmpnb is available on hub.docker.com, its size is 71.67 MB. It has 26 apk-installed packages and 10 pip-installed, so is certainly not bloated. Issues with busybox - it is included in many well known distributions (Red Hat/Centos, Debian, Arch,...). And musl libc instead of glibc - can someone think of concrete problems in context of tmpnb (or jupyter/configurable-http-proxy) docker images?