News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build... by isaacvando on Monday November 24, 2025 @01:38PM (#46037423)
We use jib at work (https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/jib) which also skips the Dockerfile and builds an image for a Java project directly.

This certainly looks like a much nicer experience than docker build, especially given that there can be a cache hit after a cache miss.

Re:We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build... by jared-jesionek on Monday November 24, 2025 @02:38PM (#46038270)
Excited to check this out! Been using rwx and it's already much faster than github actions. Interested to see how this speeds up our builds.
Re:We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build... by joshuagvk on Monday November 24, 2025 @01:32PM (#46037341)
Really interested to give this a try. I haven't used RWX for CI yet (overall my builds wouldn't have benefited enough from the caching), but docker build times are definitely a pebble in my shoe
Re:We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build... by d3Xt3r on Monday November 24, 2025 @01:53PM (#46037645)
Am I missing something or does rwx not have a free/self-hosted option?
Re:We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build... by dan_manges on Monday November 24, 2025 @01:59PM (#46037737)
Hey! I'm one of the RWX cofounders. We don't have a self-hosted option yet, but we're interested in opening it up in the future. Our infrastructure is more complex to run than normal self-hosted runners infrastructure, due to extensive caching and provisioning optimizations.
Re:We deleted our Dockerfiles: a better, faster way to build... by fourteenminutes on Monday November 24, 2025 @08:09PM (#46041283)
Love these problems being solved at a platform level rather than just a language level.