search

tinyproxy / tinyproxy

tinyproxy - a light-weight HTTP/HTTPS proxy daemon for POSIX operating systems
GNU General Public License v2.0
4.67k stars 645 forks source link

Official Docker container #501

Open jcpunk opened 11 months ago

jcpunk commented 11 months ago

Tinyproxy version

1.11.1

Issue

With the lightweight footprint of tinyproxy, it would be a helpful tool to deploy when troubleshooting network connectivity issues. Having an official container would simplify deployment and ensure folks are using known approved builds.

This project may be a candidate for the docker library of official images.

rofl0r commented 11 months ago

With the lightweight footprint of tinyproxy

the lightweightness is gone when you run it through docker - instead of a 100 kb binary you now gotta load an entire OS.

Having an official container would simplify deployment

why, because you have a premade config file ? it will need to be edited anyway. i suggest quickstart guide on the official homepage.

ensure folks are using known approved builds

as far as i'm concerned, any build from source is "approved", as long as you dont get it from shady 3rd parties. do you see it differently ?

This project may be a candidate for the docker library of official images.

that's possible, but then you opened this issue on the wrong repo - you should request it from docker folks.

denis-domanskii commented 11 months ago

I fully comprehend the philosophy of the authors of this library; you've invested hundreds of hours to create a piece of software that's extremely compact yet functional. I can see how the idea of a Docker image might seem antithetical to your fundamental principles.

However, I'm currently running it in Docker. The primary value your application offers to me is not its size, but rather its ease of configuration and operational stability. I utilize Docker to manage my home lab infrastructure in a unified manner, where all applications are neatly contained with their respective configurations, control mechanisms, and backups centralized in one place, specifically Portainer. Moreover, I operate two dedicated servers, and it's significantly simpler to click "Deploy app on server B" in the user interface than it is to manually connect via SSH and deploy/configure/run the app.

So, there isn't a definitive right or wrong approach here. You're developing this software out of passion, and it's completely within your prerogative to decide what features you want to support. However, it's equally important to consider how people utilize your product. If, for instance, 90% of your users are employing your microscope as a hammer, it might be worthwhile to consider attaching a handle.

P.S. I'm currently using kalaksi/docker-tinyproxy as a container and it's working superbly.

P.P.S. Original issue: https://github.com/tinyproxy/tinyproxy/issues/128