Support colima #1332
Support colima #1332
Conversation
| @@ -186,6 +186,8 @@ const ( | |||
| TypeDocker Type = "docker" | |||
| // TypeKubernetes represents the Kubernetes runtime | |||
| TypeKubernetes Type = "kubernetes" | |||
| // TypeColima represents the Colima runtime | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should not be necessary - it looks like you are using the Docker runtime to connect to Colima. This enum is used for different implementations of our runtime interface.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In review, I'm checking in the Docker runtime if there is a path override in the Docker runtime check, but I'm also checking explicitly if its Colima:
https://github.com/stacklok/toolhive/pull/1332/files#diff-d58624f599f4b93a4c84d22c3d24888c6a2c57855eb451ccc72815d5cda9667bR88-R94
I'd like not to remove this, because if I do, then the user has to know and explicitly override the Docker socket to the Colima socket, which requires discovery of this in the docs or otherwise.
What are your thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe I should remove the Colima check in the docker runtime codepath:
https://github.com/stacklok/toolhive/pull/1332/files#diff-d58624f599f4b93a4c84d22c3d24888c6a2c57855eb451ccc72815d5cda9667bR65-R73
|
@goshlanguage This makes sense to me. Feel free to update the branch and take it out of draft status. |
|
I added a PR that does almost exactly the same thing. I wanted to 👍 the support for this PR. I updated all of the docs to include Colima in mine. |
I needed to add
colimain order to usethvin my current setup. Opening as draft as I'm traveling as I write this PR and haven't given due diligence of going through the Dev Guide. Hoping to share for guidance.Before:
After: