Support for docker compose build --push

[maxcleme]

Signed-off-by: maxcleme [email protected]

What I did

Support docker compose build --push the same way as docker buildx build --push does.

Oddly, I was expecting it to be already supported. It occurs to me when dealing with a simple compose file locally using two platforms (linux/arm64 & linux/amd64).

However when doing docker compose push it only pushes the local image (which makes sense since my store can't really store the other). Going through the same as docker buildx build does seems logical here.

This PR is a bit opportunistic, all feedbacks are welcome 😄

Related issue

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 72.79% // Head: 73.89% // Increases project coverage by +1.10% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (e05e604) compared to base (cf12239).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

❗ Current head e05e604 differs from pull request most recent head 634a7d2. Consider uploading reports for the commit 634a7d2 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##               v2   #10148      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.79%   73.89%   +1.10%     
==========================================
  Files           2        2              
  Lines         272      272              
==========================================
+ Hits          198      201       +3     
+ Misses         62       60       -2     
+ Partials       12       11       -1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pkg/e2e/framework.go	72.15% <0.00%> (+1.17%)	⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[ndeloof]

LGTM but for this option to be introduced, the "classic" builder also need to offer this feature

[maxcleme]

@ndeloof What do you mean by "classic builder" ? Do you mind sharing more pointers? I'll be glad to update accordingly :)

[ndeloof]

in this PR you only updated the options, but the actual build implementation is here:
https://github.com/docker/compose/blob/v2/pkg/compose/build_buildkit.go
https://github.com/docker/compose/blob/v2/pkg/compose/build_classic.go

first one uses buildkit (same as docker buildx), the other uses the classic build mechanism on docker engine

[maxcleme]

Any news on this? 🤔

[glours]

I did some tests, it works well except for one use case. When you try to build and push an multi-arch image with the legacy builder we got the following error message :

~/sources/compose/pkg/e2e/fixtures/build-test/platforms feat/support_multiarch_push !1 > DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0 docker compose build --push                                                                 19:02:19
An image does not exist locally with the tag: gloursdocker/build-test-platform

instead of the message saying that the builder doesn't support the multi-arch builds

~/sources/compose/pkg/e2e/fixtures/build-test/platforms feat/support_multiarch_push !1 > DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0 docker compose build                                                                        19:02:46
1 error occurred:
	* this builder doesn't support multi-arch build, set DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 to use multi-arch builder

[maxcleme]

@glours Nice catch indeed! Should be fixed now, do you mind giving it a try again? :)

[glours]

Looks good 👍

[glours]

LGTM

[ndeloof]

this really demonstrates we should not use build.Options as input for classic builder, but that's fine for this PR

[glours]

Agree, I'll try to find time to review that