Caching build of Docker actions about cache HOT 11 OPEN

I see this issue is stale and in danger of being closed. I think this is a much needed feature that needs to be added.

from cache.

Still relevant.

from cache.

Now, we can pull a docker image from the Docker Hub or the GitHub Package Registry to skip a build step. But it is better the actions runner can cache a docker image with a built-in cache feature, not this cache action.

We are discussing at #37 that is focusing the Docker CLI, not a Docker action. We want to run a docker action with uses: key and cache it like the actions beta v1.

We can skip a docker action build step like the following as a current workaround:

- uses: peaceiris/actions-gh-pages@v2
+ uses: docker://peaceiris/gh-pages:v2

(Edit: Now, this action migrated to a TypeScript Action) GitHub Actions for GitHub Pages

Although, we cannot verify those images are trusted. I hope that we can build a docker action and cache it on the GitHub Actions runner.

from cache.

@joshmgross commented 5 minutes ago:

@ad-m I think it's fine to leave that in @actions/toolkit, as it's a general improvement to Docker actions. If the recommended step is to just cache before using every docker action, then that might be better if done by default.

from cache.

I've tried using the docker save/load strategy but it does not work when the Dockerfile has a COPY/ADD command because the SHA produced is always different, I'm not sure why that happens, I've tried both with Github managed runners and self-hosted. Self-hosted works if I don't run docker system prune which makes sense I think.

from cache.

See ad-m/github-push-action#19 too.

from cache.

Azure has recently released Teleport for images from Azure Container Registry ( https://stevelasker.blog/2019/10/29/azure-container-registry-teleportation/ ). The concept based on the use of SMB, which allows you to read only the necessary parts of layers without full transfer is very interesting, because it can give a very quick start in this use case. However, I suppose the Azure permissions model may still be too limited to direct integration, despite recent development of Azure in that area.

from cache.

Any news?

from cache.

+1

from cache.

This issue is stale because it has been open for 200 days with no activity. Leave a comment to avoid closing this issue in 5 days.

from cache.

This issue is stale because it has been open for 200 days with no activity. Leave a comment to avoid closing this issue in 5 days.

from cache.