« first day (3225 days earlier)      last day (61 days later) » 

12:20 AM
Q: Can I add an additional docker entrypoint script?

Karthikeyan JanakiramanHow does the docker entrypoint work? I have base docker image which has a entrypoint script and I am building another image on top of that which has one more entrypoint script. When I run the image will both the entrypoint scripts run?

I disagree with the mod on this one, but they seem to disagree with my flag so I thought I'd bring it back here to discuss.
There is a factual based answer that has existed for years with docker, as long as I've known the product, a container can only have a single entrypoint. And there's guidance that can be provided on how others have solved similar problems.
After posting the edit, I flagged it for a mod to review and reopen, and was declined saying "the community can see that it was edited and cast their votes", and yet a single binding vote was cast by a mod to close it. The feels like a double standard that can make SE sites feel less welcoming to new users.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but it feels like a fairly straight forward question that I've heard from other docker users before.
1 hour later…
1:57 AM
@BMitch - When a question is edited for the first time it is automatically put into the reopen queue. Infact it currently has 4 reopen votes. The process is working as it should
Seems like the community was split on that one.
It requires 5 votes to reopen.
@BMitch - There were some additional grammatical mistakes. I went ahead and fixed those, since the author was talking about ENTRYPOINT I made that clear.
12 hours later…
1:42 PM
Looks like it finally got enough votes to reopen. I don't have enough rep on this site to see/cast close votes or queues.
@Ramhound My view is if a single mod casts a binding vote to hold a question, and then the issue gets corrected, a single mod should be enough to reopen the question (preferably by the same mod, or with some back channel discussion). Only reason to leave it closed is if some other issues exist with the question which I couldn't identify myself.
Full disclosure, I am a mod on DIY, and have over 75k of rep on SO, so I have a general idea of how the process should work, and me coming back here to chat with the site mods was part of that process.
Or meta
@BMitch this is the back channel discussion
@BMitch I think part of the issue is... its pretty unclear at first and second glances what the question is about
@JourneymanGeek For me it was clear, but I've seen a lot of questions on docker. The original question did need improvement and I agree with the original decision to place it on hold.
@BMitch and there's where the bringing up on meta route helps
@JourneymanGeek If you think a meta post makes sense, I'm more than happy to post something there.
@BMitch well, its reopened
so no real point there
I'm totally adding a link to what endpoint is though
for more context
1:55 PM
I was mainly dropping in here in case a mod could say "well, we didn't reopen because it also violated some other policy, or this user is a known trouble maker."
I think it was left closed cause it didn't look as reopenable as it could have been
Similar question from another site, not that it has any weight over here, just adding context: stackoverflow.com/questions/18805073/…
honestly - the example of what he's trying to do adds a lot of context
I'd not have to reopen that cause that wouldn't have been closed to start with
Completely agreed that the original had lots of issues. Had it not gotten enough reopen votes, my concern was that it would turn a new user away from the site. I'm trying to do my best with the code of conduct.
Oh lord, I just had my morning laugh, never realized we had a clippy.
Oh, that's a SU thing
2:03 PM
Thank you SU for the chuckle
As far as new users go - the typical thing I (used to...) do is comment on how to make things better
I unfortunately don't always have the time/energy to actively do that these days though
site's a lot busier, and I got 2 to run
More than feel the struggle. Our active DIY mod just got a new job. Suddenly I have more modding to do over there.
Well, normal stuff's fine
just a lot harder to have the personal touch
2:19 PM
Q: Announcement: New Functionality

fixer1234I'll structure this as a question. You have probably seen closed questions that you thought should be reopened, but it didn't happen. You may have chalked it up to community decision. But if you thought they qualified to reopen, there's a good chance they remained closed for no good reason. Q...

Not sure what site privilege level you need to make full use of it though
I think this just means I need more rep on the site :)
2:39 PM
Good Docker answers are always valuable :D
2 hours later…
4:56 PM
@bertieb - Anyone who can issue reopen votes basically.
@Ramhound Cheers, 3k then!
It's a userscript so it just reads the underline activity on the question anyways
Makes sense
Wasn't sure if it also did some background sneaky SEDE stuff
I haven't actually looked at the source code yet
It might? My first glance at the question a week ago? was that it just added a notification if the question had reopen votes
My understanding is that it also checked if there was a completed reopen review for it
Where 'understanding' is also at a first glance
5:04 PM
all that is in the timeline so no SEDE for that info
Since a Q could have reopen votes, but enough people could have voted to "Keep Closed'
Ah right, cool cool
5:16 PM
Purpose of the script is to highlight, the question has X reopen votes, and isn't eligible for the reopen queue.

« first day (3225 days earlier)      last day (61 days later) »