> a GitHub Action utilizing our SDK to upload latest releases
Cool. So the tar would be uploaded to the hub and from there the user can manage deployments. Or maybe even create draft? deployments from the gh action and the user would only have to confirm/approve before shipping to clients.
> Do you have an exact upgrade case in mind?
Yeah, some apps could get quite complicated due to <reasons> and a single `docker compose up` for deployment won't cut it. For example, user may need to do a backup before deployment or some post deployment steps like db migrations. These steps may depend on which app version you are updating from, so even though they can be handled from within the app some logic/state is needed to determine when to execute them.
The ability to specify pre-deploy, post-deploy and a custom deploy command (not just docker compose up) would be helpful.
> A deployment can either be managed by the vendor or by the customer.
But not both? Can't the customer invite the vendor back to allow them to perform such actions when necessary?
The customer portal is a good idea, the ux needs a little polish I think. Make it super easy to see if there's a new app version, a button to install it, and perhaps real time feedback/progress. Some customers would also appreciate the ability to export a list of app deployments with logs for auditing.
> Cool. So the tar would be uploaded to the hub and from there the user can manage deployments. Or maybe even create draft? deployments from the gh action and the user would only have to confirm/approve before shipping to clients.
We don't support uploading the actual images these must be hosted in a separate container registry.
> The ability to specify pre-deploy, post-deploy and a custom deploy command (not just docker compose up) would be helpful.
I can see that thanks for the suggestion!
> But not both? Can't the customer invite the vendor back to allow them to perform such actions when necessary?
You'll probably right all of these scenarios are possible, we should make it configurable from both sides: "all the other party to manage the deployment"
> Make it super easy to see if there's a new app version,
Good point "update notifications" are also on our backlog, this feature should be definitely considered.
Cool. So the tar would be uploaded to the hub and from there the user can manage deployments. Or maybe even create draft? deployments from the gh action and the user would only have to confirm/approve before shipping to clients.
> Do you have an exact upgrade case in mind?
Yeah, some apps could get quite complicated due to <reasons> and a single `docker compose up` for deployment won't cut it. For example, user may need to do a backup before deployment or some post deployment steps like db migrations. These steps may depend on which app version you are updating from, so even though they can be handled from within the app some logic/state is needed to determine when to execute them.
The ability to specify pre-deploy, post-deploy and a custom deploy command (not just docker compose up) would be helpful.
> A deployment can either be managed by the vendor or by the customer.
But not both? Can't the customer invite the vendor back to allow them to perform such actions when necessary?
The customer portal is a good idea, the ux needs a little polish I think. Make it super easy to see if there's a new app version, a button to install it, and perhaps real time feedback/progress. Some customers would also appreciate the ability to export a list of app deployments with logs for auditing.