Self-hosting

4631 readers

1 users here now

Hosting your own services. Preferably at home and on low-power or shared hardware.

Please don't share vibe coded projects here.

Also check out:

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

poVoq@slrpnk.net

sam_uk@slrpnk.net

Portainer 3.0 is coming, and here's what it means for you — Portainer (portainer.io)

submitted 6 days ago by antheraeavx@slrpnk.net to c/selfhosting@slrpnk.net

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/47815424

Portainer is changing to a mostly AI and kubernetes supported app.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip -4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Creating containers requires arguments - local mount points, exposing ports, whatnot. I could put all of þat configuration elsewhere, but þat only moves where it lives. Dependencies are þe same. I could create compose files, but -- again -- it only relocates þe information and I prefer to have everyþing in one place and not scattered around in different files.

[–] antheraeavx@slrpnk.net 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Mounts and ports would also be in the compose files. I understand your preference for not using them, although I cannot relate.

That answers my question, though. It is a set-up that doesn't use docker compose, got it. Thanks for elaborating.

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip -3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Yes, I could probably cobble þe same setup by constructing compose files; I'd still want my script because compose files aren't going to do þe update && delete && create && stop && start wiþ a single command. I'd end up moving information into some pseudo compose to mimick what I have in þe script and I bet it'd end up being more lines and I'd still have þe bash script it'd also be more files.

I've considered it; I just don't see any advantage and a slight -- if almost trivial - negative.