It is an attempt at recreating the lazydocker command-line application from scratch, while making it available as a web application without compromising on the features.
Wouldn't it be possible to directly use lazydocker with a browser terminal such as wetty?
I would think so! Looks like the author tried some similar approaches.
In the disclaimer section:
> Before creating Isaiah, I tried to "serve lazydocker over websocket" (trying to send keypresses to the lazydocker process, and retrieving the output via Websocket), but didn't succeed, hence the full rewrite.
> I also tried to start Isaiah from the lazydocker codebase and implement a web interface on top of it, but it seemed impractical or simply beyond my skills, hence the full rewrite.
I took a crack at something like this a couple of weeks ago[0] except using ttyd. It’s been working pretty well since then and I actually really enjoy the setup.
This reminds me of k9s, particularly the UI and full functionality. I use dockge https://github.com/louislam/dockge for managing stacks on a home server. Isaiah feels very admin oriented, or perhaps developer friendly for that full docker experience via the web.
I only had a brief play but I couldn't see how to deploy a new container. That would make this a companion tool alongside something like Dockge, portainer etc.
- From an image (in the "Images" tab), you can open the menu, and run the image as is (or press "r"). You will be prompted for a container's name, and it will be created.
- You can press "C" (for Create stack), fill in a docker-compose.yml file content, and confirm. This will create a stack from your file!
Curious why people feel the need for tools like this. I think git benefits massively from a graphical tool but I don't really see the point for docker, docker compose or even kubernetes. I do find CLI completions essential, though.
Docker benefits from a graphical tool for the same reason as git does; both CLI tools often require using long id strings from the output of one command as the input of another command.
CLI is good and the best way to manage docker containers, however editing that compose file from a browser tab and hitting recreate slaps different. A web GUI makes it so that users who are otherwise intimidated by CLI can still make use of docker.
I would be worried about where that compose file is being stored. I keep my compose files in a git repo and after I edit them just do `docker compose up -d` (in fact, I hit a key in my editor and it runs that for me, showing the output).
Those are 2 hops as opposed to editing and applying the changes from a single interface. With git, assuming you are talking about an online repo, there is always the worry of accidentally leaking credentials etc. Though I assume the project mentioned here is all local so the compose files will be saved in a local directory.
I suppose the two methods (CLI and GUI) don't make much difference but they appeal to different users, maybe even different occasions for the power user.
Portainer is mentioned by the author in the README:
“What spurred me to build Isaiah in the first place is a bunch of comments on the Reddit self-hosted community, stating that Portainer and other available solutions were too heavy or hard to use.”
I like the idea of a web based text ui. But if it's a clone of an existing cli tool this seems to be going full circle, just use ssh or a web ssh client. Still a nice project though :)
Alright! I'll copy-paste an explanation I gave prior on Reddit. I legit had no idea this would spark so many conversations hahaha.
"I like to use a pen name generator, and use the generated name for my projects. It makes it easier for me to name things, rather than having to come up with new naming ideas for every new project. And also, I like the idea that every project has a person's name, as if, by using the project, you're getting the help of the person named X (X = Isaiah, Erin, Osmond, any other project I have published)."
I really had never thought of the religious aspect of Isaiah, I just went with a generated pen name I liked.
To me names are important. I have to find a good name for a project or business before I start. Or at least good-enough. This is a great naming idea. I love it.
Being mammals I firmly believe whales would have been on the ark, so I think Noah would have hung out with them. Some other people on the web disagree. It should come as no surprise this has been discussed.
I don't know of any translation in English that says whale either: https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Jonah%201%3A17 I think the idea that it was a whale comes mostly from children's adaptations extrapolating from the fact that it says "big fish", whales are big, and the people of the time wouldn't have made a linguistic distinction between fish and fish-like marine mammals.
As long as we are on this line of thought, many children's books like to put an ending that sounds like Jonah was nice and happy at the end, which is not there at all. It ends with him being admonished for valuing the plant but not the 20k people. I use this as a litmus test when looking at children's Bibles.
Also the story of Jericho. "Then they devoted all in the city to destruction, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword." is often glossed over!
I'll buy the hard-to-type part, but I don't have any particular qualms about using software named after religious figures. For context, I'm atheopagan.
That provided no context at all, lol (I legit laughed out loud). Like that's so far out of the common framework that any context provided is lost on most people (including me.)
I'm someone who often debates religion and appreciates someone who finds a philosophy that works for them, so this is no slight against your beliefs. I just find it funny that it was used to provide 'context'.
The context I was trying to provide was that I have a particular philosophical viewpoint that could predispose me towards negative association for traditional religious concepts.
Or, put another way, people like me often hate religion, especially monotheistic religion.
I always curse software, and in Italy we have full libraries of ways to curse gods and saints, I wish more projects would adopt religious names, could get 2 birds with 1 stone
In English, genesis is no more a religious word than is the given name Isaiah. That is exactly my point. One rarely hears the word genesis outside a Biblical context, and perhaps OP rarely hears the name Isaiah outside a Biblical context, but intrinsically neither are religious.
Other common Biblical names are Mary, David, Joseph, Abraham, Adam, Mathew, Daniel, Jacob, John, Simon, Michael, I could go on.
