This way, everything about Snikket will be located in a single directory (/root/snikket/), and this would make backup/restore easier.
Why not merge snikket_certs and snikket_proxy in a single container? They already use tini anyway. Actually, it would be ideal (in my opinion) to include all the services in a single container. Discourse does this, for example, and Snikket is nowhere as complex as Discourse.
Instead of network_mode: host (which of course, makes docker-compose.yml simpler), forwarding only the required ports would be cleaner, in my opinion. Yes, docker is not very efficient when you forward a range of ports (the UDP ports of the TURN server), but this range doesn't have to be very big; 100 or 200 ports are more than enough for almost all the cases.
I have a couple of proposals that in my opinion would improve
docker-compose.yml.Instead of
/etc/snikket/, why not use/root/snikket/as the main installation directory?Why not use local volume directories, like this:
This way, everything about Snikket will be located in a single directory (
/root/snikket/), and this would make backup/restore easier.Why not merge
snikket_certsandsnikket_proxyin a single container? They already usetinianyway. Actually, it would be ideal (in my opinion) to include all the services in a single container. Discourse does this, for example, and Snikket is nowhere as complex as Discourse.Instead of
network_mode: host(which of course, makesdocker-compose.ymlsimpler), forwarding only the required ports would be cleaner, in my opinion. Yes, docker is not very efficient when you forward a range of ports (the UDP ports of the TURN server), but this range doesn't have to be very big; 100 or 200 ports are more than enough for almost all the cases.