Skip to content

Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop #2682

Closed
Closed
Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop#2682
Labels
kind/feature

Description

@dnephin
dnephin
opened on Jan 17, 2016

Original implementation is #686

Now that networks don't require you to define service dependencies we could provide a new field to define an order, allowing applications to start and stop containers in a specific order.

The advantage to a new field (and not re-using an existing one), is that it allows applications that don't need an order to start and stop everything in parallel. Order would only be applied explicitly if the user wants it.

This does not address healthchecking and the problems described in #374, but it's a prerequisite of any solution to that problem. It does solve issues like #2619 (and maybe others?).

Current proposal is to name the field depends_on

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    kind/feature

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions

    , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
     blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop · Issue #2682 · docker/compose · GitHub
    Skip to content
    Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop #2682
    Closed
    Closed
    Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop#2682
    Labels
    kind/feature
    Description
    @dnephin
    dnephin
    opened on Jan 17, 2016
    Original implementation is #686
    Now that networks don't require you to define service dependencies we could provide a new field to define an order, allowing applications to start and stop containers in a specific order.
    The advantage to a new field (and not re-using an existing one), is that it allows applications that don't need an order to start and stop everything in parallel. Order would only be applied explicitly if the user wants it.
    This does not address healthchecking and the problems described in #374, but it's a prerequisite of any solution to that problem. It does solve issues like #2619 (and maybe others?).
    Current proposal is to name the field depends_on
    Metadata
    Metadata
    Assignees
    No one assigned
      Labels
      kind/feature
      Type
      No type
      Projects
      No projects
      Milestone
      No milestone
      Relationships
      None yet
      Development
      No branches or pull requests
      Issue actions
      
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop · Issue #2682 · docker/compose · GitHub
      Skip to content
      Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop #2682
      Closed
      Closed
      Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop#2682
      Labels
      kind/feature
      Description
      @dnephin
      dnephin
      opened on Jan 17, 2016
      Original implementation is #686
      Now that networks don't require you to define service dependencies we could provide a new field to define an order, allowing applications to start and stop containers in a specific order.
      The advantage to a new field (and not re-using an existing one), is that it allows applications that don't need an order to start and stop everything in parallel. Order would only be applied explicitly if the user wants it.
      This does not address healthchecking and the problems described in #374, but it's a prerequisite of any solution to that problem. It does solve issues like #2619 (and maybe others?).
      Current proposal is to name the field depends_on
      Metadata
      Metadata
      Assignees
      No one assigned
        Labels
        kind/feature
        Type
        No type
        Projects
        No projects
        Milestone
        No milestone
        Relationships
        None yet
        Development
        No branches or pull requests
        Issue actions
        
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop · Issue #2682 · docker/compose · GitHub
        Skip to content
        Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop #2682
        Closed
        Closed
        Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop#2682
        Labels
        kind/feature
        Description
        @dnephin
        dnephin
        opened on Jan 17, 2016
        Original implementation is #686
        Now that networks don't require you to define service dependencies we could provide a new field to define an order, allowing applications to start and stop containers in a specific order.
        The advantage to a new field (and not re-using an existing one), is that it allows applications that don't need an order to start and stop everything in parallel. Order would only be applied explicitly if the user wants it.
        This does not address healthchecking and the problems described in #374, but it's a prerequisite of any solution to that problem. It does solve issues like #2619 (and maybe others?).
        Current proposal is to name the field depends_on
        Metadata
        Metadata
        Assignees
        No one assigned
          Labels
          kind/feature
          Type
          No type
          Projects
          No projects
          Milestone
          No milestone
          Relationships
          None yet
          Development
          No branches or pull requests
          Issue actions
          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop · Issue #2682 · docker/compose · GitHub
          Skip to content
          Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop #2682
          Closed
          Closed
          Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop#2682
          Labels
          kind/feature
          Description
          @dnephin
          dnephin
          opened on Jan 17, 2016
          Original implementation is #686
          Now that networks don't require you to define service dependencies we could provide a new field to define an order, allowing applications to start and stop containers in a specific order.
          The advantage to a new field (and not re-using an existing one), is that it allows applications that don't need an order to start and stop everything in parallel. Order would only be applied explicitly if the user wants it.
          This does not address healthchecking and the problems described in #374, but it's a prerequisite of any solution to that problem. It does solve issues like #2619 (and maybe others?).
          Current proposal is to name the field depends_on
          Metadata
          Metadata
          Assignees
          No one assigned
            Labels
            kind/feature
            Type
            No type
            Projects
            No projects
            Milestone
            No milestone
            Relationships
            None yet
            Development
            No branches or pull requests
            Issue actions
            
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop · Issue #2682 · docker/compose · GitHub
            Skip to content
            Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop #2682
            Closed
            Closed
            Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop#2682
            Labels
            kind/feature
            Description
            @dnephin
            dnephin
            opened on Jan 17, 2016
            Original implementation is #686
            Now that networks don't require you to define service dependencies we could provide a new field to define an order, allowing applications to start and stop containers in a specific order.
            The advantage to a new field (and not re-using an existing one), is that it allows applications that don't need an order to start and stop everything in parallel. Order would only be applied explicitly if the user wants it.
            This does not address healthchecking and the problems described in #374, but it's a prerequisite of any solution to that problem. It does solve issues like #2619 (and maybe others?).
            Current proposal is to name the field depends_on
            Metadata
            Metadata
            Assignees
            No one assigned
              Labels
              kind/feature
              Type
              No type
              Projects
              No projects
              Milestone
              No milestone
              Relationships
              None yet
              Development
              No branches or pull requests
              Issue actions
              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
})();
Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop · Issue #2682 · docker/compose · GitHub
              Skip to content
              Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop #2682
              Closed
              Closed
              Proposal: New field to define ordered start and stop#2682
              Labels
              kind/feature
              Description
              @dnephin
              dnephin
              opened on Jan 17, 2016
              Original implementation is #686
              Now that networks don't require you to define service dependencies we could provide a new field to define an order, allowing applications to start and stop containers in a specific order.
              The advantage to a new field (and not re-using an existing one), is that it allows applications that don't need an order to start and stop everything in parallel. Order would only be applied explicitly if the user wants it.
              This does not address healthchecking and the problems described in #374, but it's a prerequisite of any solution to that problem. It does solve issues like #2619 (and maybe others?).
              Current proposal is to name the field depends_on
              Metadata
              Metadata
              Assignees
              No one assigned
                Labels
                kind/feature
                Type
                No type
                Projects
                No projects
                Milestone
                No milestone
                Relationships
                None yet
                Development
                No branches or pull requests
                Issue actions