starred/cypht

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht.git synced 2026-04-26 05:26:00 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #1016] Decide where Cypht's Docker images will live #541

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00 by kerem · 8 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @marclaporte on GitHub (May 9, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht/issues/1016

Originally assigned to: @rodriguezny on GitHub.

Cypht's founder (Jason Munro) was publishing Docker images here: https://hub.docker.com/r/sailfrog/cypht-docker

More background info here: https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht-docker/issues/31 but Jason's expertise is not Docker, and this part was not worked on that much. Despite this, we have over 100K+ pulls!

We have control of this account and Jason is not using for anything else.

Option 1:

We deprecate https://hub.docker.com/r/sailfrog/cypht-docker and we point everyone to a URL that looks more official
We need to do some research to see if there is a seamless redirect, or accept any negative impacts on the project (ex.: tons of users need to update their repos, loosing the pull stats, etc.

Option 2:

We keep https://hub.docker.com/r/sailfrog/cypht-docker as the official source
We convert it to an organization: https://docs.docker.com/admin/convert-account/
We document clearly any changes following the major changes: https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht/pull/1001

We are a good candidate for "Docker-Sponsored Open Source program"
https://www.docker.com/community/open-source/application/

Can someone think of an option 3?

On a related note: while the project now lives at https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht instead of https://github.com/jasonmunro/cypht, we opted to not change the packages on Packagist.org. So we have less official-looking URLs:

Originally created by @marclaporte on GitHub (May 9, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht/issues/1016 Originally assigned to: @rodriguezny on GitHub. Cypht's founder (Jason Munro) was publishing Docker images here: https://hub.docker.com/r/sailfrog/cypht-docker More background info here: https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht-docker/issues/31 but Jason's expertise is not Docker, and this part was not worked on that much. Despite this, we have over 100K+ pulls! ![image](https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht/assets/1004261/68ad7ad6-a5a8-4ce2-9c2b-8d06c9eef6c6) We have control of this account and Jason is not using for anything else. Option 1: * We deprecate https://hub.docker.com/r/sailfrog/cypht-docker and we point everyone to a URL that looks more official * We need to do some research to see if there is a seamless redirect, or accept any negative impacts on the project (ex.: tons of users need to update their repos, loosing the pull stats, etc. Option 2: * We keep https://hub.docker.com/r/sailfrog/cypht-docker as the official source * We convert it to an organization: https://docs.docker.com/admin/convert-account/ * We document clearly any changes following the major changes: https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht/pull/1001 We are a good candidate for "Docker-Sponsored Open Source program" https://www.docker.com/community/open-source/application/ Can someone think of an option 3? On a related note: while the project now lives at https://github.com/cypht-org/cypht instead of https://github.com/jasonmunro/cypht, we opted to not change the packages on Packagist.org. So we have less official-looking URLs: * https://packagist.org/packages/jason-munro/cypht * https://packagist.org/packages/henrique-borba/php-sieve-manager Related discussion: https://github.com/composer/packagist/issues/47

kerem closed this issue

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@jonocodes commented on GitHub (May 9, 2024):

Docker-Sponsored Open Source program is a great idea

@jonocodes commented on GitHub (May 9, 2024): Docker-Sponsored Open Source program is a great idea

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (May 10, 2024):

@rodriguezny @kroky @fabiomontefuscolo please advise.

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (May 10, 2024): @rodriguezny @kroky @fabiomontefuscolo please advise.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@fabiomontefuscolo commented on GitHub (May 10, 2024):

There is a while since I have played in Docker hub, but I feel you first need to create an Org on their website, and then, create the repo in the Org account. That would allow you to have a more meaningful URL and also add other people to manage the repo, without giving them your credentials. The same we did for Tiki (with Benoit).

I think it is still time to change URL, but well, if you can keep the old address hanging there for some weeks, people will have time to replace the URL in their CI systems or other automated routines.

@marclaporte does Tiki have a sponsored account? (I can't see from my account)

As always, thank you for the Cypht!! 😄 🤓

@fabiomontefuscolo commented on GitHub (May 10, 2024): There is a while since I have played in Docker hub, but I feel you first need to create an Org on their website, and then, create the repo in the Org account. That would allow you to have a more meaningful URL and also add other people to manage the repo, without giving them your credentials. The same we did for Tiki (with Benoit). I think it is still time to change URL, but well, if you can keep the old address hanging there for some weeks, people will have time to replace the URL in their CI systems or other automated routines. @marclaporte does Tiki have a sponsored account? (I can't see from my account) As always, thank you for the Cypht!! :smile: :nerd_face:

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (May 10, 2024):

does Tiki have a sponsored account?

yes, managed by @rodriguezny

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (May 10, 2024): > does Tiki have a sponsored account? yes, managed by @rodriguezny

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@kroky commented on GitHub (May 10, 2024):

Option 2 sounds good.

@kroky commented on GitHub (May 10, 2024): Option 2 sounds good.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@rodriguezny commented on GitHub (May 13, 2024):

Option 1 would be good as it can allow to have a URL that looks more official. Instead of its cons, we should pick it. The main issue for me with option 1 is to loose the 100K+ pull stats. I would like to have a cypht-org account on dockerhub as we have on github. So, if there is nothing to do to remediate to the 100K+ lost, let's pick option 2 due to cons that has option 1.

@rodriguezny commented on GitHub (May 13, 2024): Option 1 would be good as it can allow to have a URL that looks more official. Instead of its cons, we should pick it. The main issue for me with option 1 is to loose the 100K+ pull stats. I would like to have a cypht-org account on dockerhub as we have on github. So, if there is nothing to do to remediate to the 100K+ lost, let's pick option 2 due to cons that has option 1.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@rodriguezny commented on GitHub (May 24, 2024):

Hello everyone, after re-analyzing of pros and cons of both of the 2 options, we(@marclaporte and I) decided to pick the option 1. Sure we will loose the 100K+ but we will a more official account like other projects on dockerhub . We will gain pull stats with time as cypht docker image is now more enhanced with the help of @jonocodes (thank you) and cypht app itself is being enhanced from day to day with the help of different contributors( thanks to everyone). We already created https://hub.docker.com/orgs/cypht, an organization account where cypht's docker images will live. We also decide to change the image name from cypht-docker to simply "cypht". So the image will be tagged like this when pushing cypht/cypht:tag_name
Thanks!

@rodriguezny commented on GitHub (May 24, 2024): Hello everyone, after re-analyzing of pros and cons of both of the 2 options, we(@marclaporte and I) decided to pick the option 1. Sure we will loose the 100K+ but we will a more official account like other projects on dockerhub . We will gain pull stats with time as cypht docker image is now more enhanced with the help of @jonocodes (thank you) and cypht app itself is being enhanced from day to day with the help of different contributors( thanks to everyone). We already created [https://hub.docker.com/orgs/cypht](https://hub.docker.com/orgs/cypht), an organization account where cypht's docker images will live. We also decide to change the image name from cypht-docker to simply "cypht". So the image will be tagged like this when pushing `cypht/cypht:tag_name` Thanks!

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:35:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (May 24, 2024):

https://hub.docker.com/u/cypht will have something to pull soon!

Thank you @jonocodes for your leadership and expertise!

@rodriguezny is working on the application for the Docker-Sponsored Open Source program.

@marclaporte commented on GitHub (May 24, 2024): https://hub.docker.com/u/cypht will have something to pull soon! Thank you @jonocodes for your leadership and expertise! @rodriguezny is working on the application for the Docker-Sponsored Open Source program.

kerem referenced this issue

2026-02-25 21:36:31 +03:00

[PR #541] [CLOSED] Cypht: addition of the selection with ctrl click and of the multiple selection with shift clicks of the mails while clicking on all the entry. #882