Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add an option to exclude files or folders to complement dockerignore/containerignore #1323

Open
sgaist opened this issue Dec 13, 2023 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1325
Open

Add an option to exclude files or folders to complement dockerignore/containerignore #1323

sgaist opened this issue Dec 13, 2023 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1325

Comments

@sgaist
Copy link
Contributor

sgaist commented Dec 13, 2023

Proposed change

#1205 implements the support for .dockerignore and .containerignore files however this requires for people to explicitly add these files to their project.

The goal of this new option would be for example for BinderHub admins to be able to have a default set of files and/or folders that they want to systematically ignore. For example, the .git folder which might be large and not of interest.

Alternative options

Ensure all projects have a .dockerignore or .containerignore file

Who would use this feature?

Currently I see it it mainly for the BinderHub admins.

How much effort will adding it take?

This should not be a big task as part of the logic is already implemented in #1205 and the option values would basically be appended to the list.

Who can do this work?

I can implement that.

@minrk
Copy link
Member

minrk commented Jan 24, 2024

I think there's one important thing that hasn't been established. This is a configuration option for binderhub deployments to deviate from each other in terms of what images they produce from the same repo, with the ability for deployments to either override or default exclusions (TBD in implementation).

It seems in order for this to be useful, you'd have to have a situation where many repositories regularly have files that should be excluded from images that follow a particular pattern and no repos have files that follow the same pattern that should be included, but it is not reasonable or feasible to suggest repo owners specify exclusions. Does such a situation exist in practice? If not, I think we should wait for an actual deployment to make its case that its images are too big, simple exclusion files would fix the problem, and their users cannot be expected to resolve the situation in their repos.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants