That Dockerfile looks exactly like a multi-stage build Dockerfile, just with custom and non-standard syntax.
Why NIH instead of simply adopting the already supported Dockerfile syntax of doing the same thing?
> But most importantly, all builds are completely reproducible.
This is only true if the commands that the recipe executes are reproducible. If someone's pulling packages from PyPi or C[PR]AN or ... w/out locking the versions, all bets are off.
This is one of my biggest beefs with many containerization sales pitches...
> A familiar Dockerfile-like syntax is used, [...]
Oh, no. Another slightly different format? :/
This looks a lot like Toast: https://github.com/stepchowfun/toast
I strive to see a selling feature in comparison to gitlab-ci... Mixing its syntax with docker is only so little.
Dockerfiles in YAML
Looks nice
This essentially looks like a Makefile where the tasks (targets) are run inside Docker containers. That is useful, I've definitely written Makefiles where tasks run in containers, and I wish it was easier.
But does this actually replace Bazel? Without language specific rules, like knowledge of dependencies, can it build a full dependency graph? If I have a monorepo with many packages, can Earthly build only what needs to be built, and always build what needs to be built?