Nice UI.
But my mainproblem is not solved with an UI.
I did not understand who uses only default containers without configuration or only the small possible container configurations? For such people a default UI is perfect.
E.g. Containers with Linked Data-Containers to store the Data outside of a container, or setting up a container with different parameters (company/server specific). For such things i need an extra system which can not be used with your or any other UI.
We build our own small template system to manage Domains, Subdomains and the setup of the software within a container. How could this be connected to your UI?
It would be great if your Template-System will integrate an API, so really configurable Templates will be possible. Allow external Scripts, or better access to an Rest-Api to get configurations. This will be a huge advantage over other standard UIs.
> E.g. Containers with Linked Data-Containers to store the Data outside of a container, or setting up a container with different parameters (company/server specific). For such things i need an extra system which can not be used with your or any other UI.
What ways are you injecting new data in? This service appears to support environment variables (which sounds right for setting up a container with different parameters) and volumes, do those not meet your needs? I'm always slightly hazy on the volumes-from data-container pattern so perhaps not.
The ENV vars for a container are part of the standard docker system, they work as expected and are supported by many UIs.
I mean how dynamic data come into the Container from the UI, when you setup a new container?
I use the data to setup the container, get letsencrypt certificates, update nginx proxy, add to backups, ....
Example: I setup a new Apache+PHP-Container with Domain xyz.com, now i want to add a subdomain abc.xyz.com. How can i do that with the UI and automatically inform my other components about the changes. That is what i mean with, that the UI solve not this problem for me and it has no API to connect.
Or their template system is not flexible enough to handle such things.
Currently my data is stored in conf files and i use some custom scripts to create / update the docker containers, update proxy, ....
The main advantage against shipyard is that you only need to deploy one container to run Portainer, it's really simple and quick. Shipyard deployment is more complex.
Have you ever thought about adding support for kvm/QEMU/virsh-based virtual machines as well?
I've been looking for a easy to use interface that gives a comprehensive overview of virtual machines as well as containers as I'm often using a mix of both.
Cockpit [1] too, although that might be a bit more focused on single machine management than on clusters (don't use any of those - so I can't tell for sure)
Is this commercial? Open source? I managed to find the github repository[1]. While it is linked to on the homepage, it isn't all that discoverable. From there, it looks like this is licensed until a BSD-like (zlib) license. If that's the case, what's the model for this? Is there a commercial offering coming, or is it really just an open-source management engine?
Hi there, we are releasing portainer as opensource, with a paid support option available for people running in production. In the future we also plan to offer paid plugins/extensions, to support things like LDAP authentication. The core functionality will always be free and always open source.
It looks absolutely amazing! Is it compatible with swarm mode? It would be awesome if it was a bit more explicit that it was running on a swarm/which node...
Thanks a lot ! It is indeed compatible with Swarm mode and allows you to manage your services. A lot of work is currently in progress on this part ! Feel free to try it and give use some feedback :)
So, here's a concern for you: this provides for a severe security hole, since it has the ability to effectively run as root on any machine its connected to (a'la privileged mode, volumes, network, leaking secrets through environment variables). It might be worthwhile to find a way to mitigate that security hole, or add some serious access control restrictions.
I wouldn't be too surprised if your test cluster machines are frequently rooted.
Saw it, loved it, installed in only 30 seconds, now using it in production. There are definitely issues to be resolved but I believe most of them are simple enough for single commits.
It should be noted that this project still lacks proper access management. There is no authentication either. You can set up Basic Auth but it feels dirty in my opinion. Guard it behind your firewall if you are gonna use it in production.
Our work is based on DockerUI, we do have a few extra features not implemented in DockerUI yet (container console for example), Swarm support and Portainer works well with Docker for Windows.
We used DockerUI as our initial inspiration and codebase, but have added so many more features, and make it so much cleaner... If you are using DockerUI, then switching to portainer should be an easy choice
Thanks! I started using it on two machines already, no problems so far. It's great that it runs from a single Docker container without any stupid "curl | sudo bash" scripts.
I tried the instructions for Linux on a Mac: https://portainer.readthedocs.io/en/latest/deployment.html#c....
(I'm guessing the developers simply haven't tested on Mac)
So far, it seems to work. My guess is that the developers haven't had a chance to test on a Mac and just don't want to make any claims just yet.
This is awesome ! Indeed we don't have any Mac and so we did not have the possibility to try it. We'll ask a few Mac users to give it a go before claiming Mac support. Thanks a lot !
It's like Rancher but for Docker Swarm (or just a host with Docker). I really like it! We run our own container registry for our engineering group based on Artifactory. Could this be made to work with that (or even Quay)? [EDIT]Actually I just deployed this and saw that you can support other registries out of the box. Cool!
I agree. Rancher has too many balls in the air. They are trying to support Cattle, Swarm, Mesos, Kubernetes...
As a result they aren't terribly good at anything (The UI is insanely slow). Other specialized tools that just focus on one orchestration framework could zoom past Rancher. Look at the Kubernetes UI in 1.4.
Thanks ! A desktop app is not in the roadmap at the moment. Portainer is built to be easy to deploy and you just need to deploy one container to get it running so it can really be useful to manage local development environments :)
I did not understand who uses only default containers without configuration or only the small possible container configurations? For such people a default UI is perfect.
E.g. Containers with Linked Data-Containers to store the Data outside of a container, or setting up a container with different parameters (company/server specific). For such things i need an extra system which can not be used with your or any other UI.
We build our own small template system to manage Domains, Subdomains and the setup of the software within a container. How could this be connected to your UI?
It would be great if your Template-System will integrate an API, so really configurable Templates will be possible. Allow external Scripts, or better access to an Rest-Api to get configurations. This will be a huge advantage over other standard UIs.