officerdev/platform
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

todo: OPM sits on the docker network, so containers need no published port

Browse Source 
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
pastilhas
2026-08-25 10:04:36 +00:00
co-authored by Claude Fable 5
parent c4cd42eb29
commit f56b9de0d6
1 changed files with 23 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
todo/infra/opm-officer-s-own-process-manager.md
+23
View File
@@ -28,3 +28,26 @@ running on `officer-dev` or `alpha` today.
Open, and the owner's call: whether OPM is a genuinely new supervisor or PM2 kept underneath with its own
daemon, namespace and CLI wrapper — which would buy the separation at a fraction of the cost, since the
`ecosystem.config.cjs` generation, the naming convention and the restart discipline all already exist.
---
**Decided 2026-08-25: it is happening, and it answers the open question above.** OPM is a genuinely new
supervisor, not PM2-with-a-wrapper — because the next requirement needs something PM2 was never built
for: **OPM should sit ON the Docker network, so a container-backed dependency never needs a published
host port at all.**
Verified on this host what that would remove. `docker network ls` shows dedicated bridge networks
already in place (`officerdev`, `services`, `nginx`) — the grouping this asks for exists, containers are
just not reached through it. What IS published today, purely so a host process can reach a container,
is the thing this closes: `officer-postgres` is `127.0.0.1:5432->5432`, `gitea` is
`127.0.0.1:9004->3000` and `127.0.0.1:10023->22`. Every one of those bindings exists for exactly one
reason — a process on the host, not in Docker, needs to reach the container — and every one is a port
that answers on localhost to anything else running as the same user, not only to Officer.
If OPM itself runs attached to the Docker network (or as a container on it), it reaches
`officer-postgres:5432` and `gitea:3000` by container name, over the network Docker already isolates,
and the host-published bindings above stop being necessary for Officer's own processes to work. Whether
they can be removed entirely depends on who ELSE reaches them this way — `POSTGRES_URL` and any
migration/backup tooling run from a plain shell would need to move onto the network too, or keep a
narrower published port for that one purpose. That accounting is the first real task once this starts,
not an assumption to build on.