[Proposal] Recommend using multi-stage build to use composer about docker HOT 8 CLOSED

Just to clarify, you're suggesting to add this to the readme/docs that are presented on the Docker hub?

from docker.

There is one drawback though: Composer needs the Zip extension at runtime, and may need VCS tools (if you install from source). When using a multi-stage builds, these are needed in your own image.

from docker.

@alcohol yes, this proposal is about documentation

from docker.

Alright, I'm in favor of documenting this 👍 .

But indeed, word of caution should also be added regarding possibly required tooling/extensions.

from docker.

Docs can be adjusted by forking https://github.com/docker-library/docs and then changing the files inside the composer directory. Not sure if just anyone can fork and submit though, or if I have to submit it from my fork.

from docker.

The multistage build can be used to build the app inside the composer container and copy over the app to the final image. The new --chown flag for COPY (docker 17.09) will take care of the permissions. (Changing permissions in the final image would lead to an additional layer with the size of all changed files).
This way you don't need any vcs tools inside the final image.

from docker.

@t3easy but you have the same drawback than the current usage of a separate container to use Composer: platform packages are based on the PHP runtime added in the composer image, not on your actual PHP runtime, impacting the dependency resolution.
Plus, your solution works only if you use composer only at build time (which is not the case when you want to run composer update or composer require btw). for development tools, you need to be able to have a shell with composer available (which is the case with the current approach using a composer container, and also when copying composer to your own container)

from docker.

Does docker-library/docs#1017 suffice for now?

from docker.