Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with versioning
Search options not deleted
user 30730
Questions about versioning, e.g. should semantic versioning be used and how to increment it
1
vote
Accepted
A case for exceeding docker's max depth
I ended up using docker-squash.
Install: pip install docker-squash
Example usage, squash up to <LAYER>:
docker-squash -f <LAYER> -t <IMAGE>:squashed <IMAGE>:<TAG>
1
vote
1
answer
1k
views
A case for exceeding docker's max depth
Solution 2: Start versioning the common image. Find a way to correlate the app version with the common image tag. Pass the tag in a --build-arg to docker build. This solution is complicated. … Versioning the common image is doable. For instance, the build digest can be used to tag. Now you can't correlate the app versions with the common bundle in a straight forward way. …